[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 921.

bz

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

Quote from: BinoX on December 28, 2011, 05:55:51 PM

Mine is also none for namecoins on the same block, so it's possible that it's how it's supposed to be...

0.1+ bitcoins a round? What kinda hashrate you got?

3.9GH (a mix of 13 GPUs in 5 systems, wish I could justify FPGAs)

bz

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

Quote from: slush on December 28, 2011, 06:38:36 PM

I'm sorry for today issue with block rewards, everything is fixed now.

Looks good now, thanks!

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

I'm sorry for today issue with block rewards, everything is fixed now.

BinoX

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Mine is also none for namecoins on the same block, so it's possible that it's how it's supposed to be...

0.1+ bitcoins a round? What kinda hashrate you got?

bz

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

From BTC stats:

9665    2011-12-28 15:04:18    1:02:26    1025518    0.16221904    0.76167915    159551    53 confirmations left
9664    2011-12-28 14:01:48    2:32:25    2379799    0.17081438    none    159547    49 confirmations left
9663    2011-12-28 11:29:19    0:03:35    60187    0.13084748    0.19946604    159534    36 confirmations left

Given NMC stats:

6923    2011-12-28 14:01:48    0:01:53    35286    41 confirmations left
6922    2011-12-28 13:59:53    0:00:50    35285    40 confirmations left
6921    2011-12-28 13:59:01    0:12:07    35284    39 confirmations left
6920    2011-12-28 13:46:52    0:19:17    35283    38 confirmations left
6919    2011-12-28 13:27:33    1:58:09    35280    35 confirmations left
6918    2011-12-28 11:29:19    0:03:34    35265    20 confirmations left

Should namecoins for BTC 9664 be none?

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

And now it appears fixed! My confirmed has rose and a payment processed. Thanks Slush!

jonathan

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 14

seems there is a problem here too. I've been stuck on a confirmed reward of 0.96934018 BTC since this morning--it's now 6PM here. I'm watching confirmations roll past 120, one after the other. My GPU is whirring away, and my stats page at bitcoin.cz is showing my shares, but there's no change to the reward. I gotta go now, unfortunately :-O

Update: All good now. Thanks Slush :-)

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: BinoX on December 28, 2011, 10:47:47 AM

Just noticed on the stats page that the last 3 blocks have been "Processing..." for quite a long time, is there some kind of issue, or should I just be more patient?

Also my confirmed balance stopped rising even though a few blocks have been confirmed.

Idzy

member

Activity: 95

Merit: 10

Yeah and my average mhs is wrong too, I'm pushsing close to 300mhs with my 2 miners and the site is showing 156mhs.

BinoX

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Just noticed on the stats page that the last 3 blocks have been "Processing..." for quite a long time, is there some kind of issue, or should I just be more patient?

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: slush on December 24, 2011, 08:17:35 AM

Quote from: -ck on December 23, 2011, 11:43:44 PM

Indeed, but it doesn't explain the bug report occurring in the first place, unless they entered the pool details wrongly into cgminer.

What is the original bug report? Maybe I can help to track it...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.634585

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: -ck on December 23, 2011, 11:43:44 PM

Indeed, but it doesn't explain the bug report occurring in the first place, unless they entered the pool details wrongly into cgminer.

What is the original bug report? Maybe I can help to track it...

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: slush on December 23, 2011, 04:11:25 PM

Quote from: -ck on December 23, 2011, 04:06:09 PM

I just tested connecting to your pool:

[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Pool 0 http://api.bitcoin.cz:8332 active
[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Long-polling activated for http://api.bitcoin.cz:8401

Then I waited for a longpoll which worked.
Seems to work fine as far as I can tell.

Yes, that looks fine. Great that it works!

Indeed, but it doesn't explain the bug report occurring in the first place, unless they entered the pool details wrongly into cgminer.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: -ck on December 23, 2011, 04:06:09 PM

I just tested connecting to your pool:

[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Pool 0 http://api.bitcoin.cz:8332 active
[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Long-polling activated for http://api.bitcoin.cz:8401

Then I waited for a longpoll which worked.
Seems to work fine as far as I can tell.

Yes, that looks fine. Great that it works!

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: slush on December 21, 2011, 08:36:29 AM

Quote from: -ck on December 21, 2011, 06:30:34 AM

Thanks. I didn't say "dirty" I just said unique, and there really is no "standard" for anything really, just precedence, and deepbit was first. Their precedence was just a url, not a different port. Anyway I'll think about it since this is really just providing better support for slush and has no influence on any other pool.

"Just a URL" - it's exactly the reason why I said I'm following deepbit's specification, as I'm using standard URL in LP response. And yes, port is the part of URL, too.

Sorry to hear that it's problem in C++, but it's currently almost impossible to change implementation to run on the same port. I hope you'll resolve the issue on your side and it will run without any problem.

I just tested connecting to your pool:

[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Pool 0 http://api.bitcoin.cz:8332 active
[2011-12-24 08:00:33] Long-polling activated for http://api.bitcoin.cz:8401

Then I waited for a longpoll which worked.
Seems to work fine as far as I can tell.

SistaS0uljah

newbie

Activity: 43

Merit: 0

Quote from: dishwara on December 22, 2011, 07:04:27 AM

Quote from: kkurtmann on December 22, 2011, 03:03:41 AM

anyone ever give bitcoins as x-mas gifts b4?

No
So far only 2 x-mas came after bitcoin created.
& last time bitcoin is less than 1 USD when x-mas came.

Let see anyone gives this year.

I'm thinking about giving my son some bitcoins this year as a gift. He's expressed some interest in the concept, but hasn't pursued it with any enthusiasm yet (he's in college, and overwhelmed with schoolwork right now). All I need to do is have him install the client on his Mac and then provide me with an address and then I can send him a shiny new Bitcoin, freshly mined. He doesn't see the use for them right now, but we'll have a discussion about it when he comes home for the holidays.

dishwara

legendary

Activity: 1855

Merit: 1016

Quote from: kkurtmann on December 22, 2011, 03:03:41 AM

anyone ever give bitcoins as x-mas gifts b4?

No
So far only 2 x-mas came after bitcoin created.
& last time bitcoin is less than 1 USD when x-mas came.

Let see anyone gives this year.

kkurtmann

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 250

anyone ever give bitcoins as x-mas gifts b4?

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: -ck on December 21, 2011, 06:30:34 AM

Thanks. I didn't say "dirty" I just said unique, and there really is no "standard" for anything really, just precedence, and deepbit was first. Their precedence was just a url, not a different port. Anyway I'll think about it since this is really just providing better support for slush and has no influence on any other pool.

"Just a URL" - it's exactly the reason why I said I'm following deepbit's specification, as I'm using standard URL in LP response. And yes, port is the part of URL, too.

Sorry to hear that it's problem in C++, but it's currently almost impossible to change implementation to run on the same port. I hope you'll resolve the issue on your side and it will run without any problem.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: slush on December 20, 2011, 05:43:19 AM

ckolivas: Yes, it's still using another port, because long polling daemon is separate application. There's nothing 'dirty' on such approach; if your miner have correct support for long polling standard and follows redirects of URL correctly, it will work.

Thanks. I didn't say "dirty" I just said unique, and there really is no "standard" for anything really, just precedence, and deepbit was first. Their precedence was just a url, not a different port. Anyway I'll think about it since this is really just providing better support for slush and has no influence on any other pool.

Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 921. (Read 4382653 times)