[500 GH/s]HHTT -Selected Diff/Stratum/PPLNS/Paid Stales/High Availability/Tor - page 31.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Quote from: organofcorti on August 31, 2012, 09:50:29 AM

Sorry, I was replying to the part I bolded above. You could mine here just as well without asics just by reduce D to below 32.

I've been experimenting with d2, 4, 8, 10, 16, 20 and 32.

All work fine, the variance is abit wild with 32 on my CM1, it all works out over 24 hours of course, it's no bother. It's just funny to see it say I'm doing 2.1Gh/s sometimes. I believe it be more stable on for higher performance system like ASIC, that is all.

I've been mining quiet happily on diff4 recently. Might keep it there or go back to 8. 8 matches the number of chips, seemed like a nice thing to do.
*waits for someone to point out that makes no mathematical sense*
Tongue

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:48:50 AM

Quote from: organofcorti on August 31, 2012, 09:47:52 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:38:21 AM

Quote from: -ck on August 31, 2012, 09:21:14 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:17:30 AM

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

Variance at diff 32 is 32^2 times greater, i.e. 1024 times... so in my opinion, diff 32 is too high for current mining hardware in light of that (see my earlier post).

Didn't know the exact math, so went with a generalisation. So yeah, it's apparently a bit higher than I thought.
It is fun to experiment with many different difficulties and I've found it provides just as much over 24 hours.

I've played around with all kinds of difficulties now. 32 works fine, not ideal, I'm sure but does not make it worse.
I'm sure when I get some ASIC's this will be ideal.

Lethos, you can select any D (maybe it has to be integer valued? not sure). Just try a lower D daily share variance isn't a problem.

I'm not saying it was a problem.

Sorry, I was replying to the part I bolded above. You could mine here just as well without asics just by reduce D to below 32.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Quote from: organofcorti on August 31, 2012, 09:47:52 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:38:21 AM

Quote from: -ck on August 31, 2012, 09:21:14 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:17:30 AM

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

Variance at diff 32 is 32^2 times greater, i.e. 1024 times... so in my opinion, diff 32 is too high for current mining hardware in light of that (see my earlier post).

Didn't know the exact math, so went with a generalisation. So yeah, it's apparently a bit higher than I thought.
It is fun to experiment with many different difficulties and I've found it provides just as much over 24 hours.

I've played around with all kinds of difficulties now. 32 works fine, not ideal, I'm sure but does not make it worse.
I'm sure when I get some ASIC's this will be ideal.

Lethos, you can select any D (maybe it has to be integer valued? not sure). Just try a lower D daily share variance isn't a problem.

I'm not saying it was a problem.

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:38:21 AM

Quote from: -ck on August 31, 2012, 09:21:14 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:17:30 AM

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

Variance at diff 32 is 32^2 times greater, i.e. 1024 times... so in my opinion, diff 32 is too high for current mining hardware in light of that (see my earlier post).

Didn't know the exact math, so went with a generalisation. So yeah, it's apparently a bit higher than I thought.
It is fun to experiment with many different difficulties and I've found it provides just as much over 24 hours.

I've played around with all kinds of difficulties now. 32 works fine, not ideal, I'm sure but does not make it worse.
I'm sure when I get some ASIC's this will be ideal.

Lethos, you can select any D (maybe it has to be integer valued? not sure). Just try a lower D daily share variance isn't a problem.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Quote from: -ck on August 31, 2012, 09:21:14 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:17:30 AM

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

Variance at diff 32 is 32^2 times greater, i.e. 1024 times... so in my opinion, diff 32 is too high for current mining hardware in light of that (see my earlier post).

Didn't know the exact math, so went with a generalisation. So yeah, it's apparently a bit higher than I thought.
It is fun to experiment with many different difficulties and I've found it provides just as much over 24 hours.

I've played around with all kinds of difficulties now. 32 works fine, not ideal, I'm sure but does not make it worse.
I'm sure when I get some ASIC's this will be ideal.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: Lethos on August 31, 2012, 09:17:30 AM

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

Variance at diff 32 is 32^2 times greater, i.e. 1024 times... so in my opinion, diff 32 is too high for current mining hardware in light of that (see my earlier post).

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Bitcoin difficult still seems on the rise if anything, so I would just knock that up the variance in submitting a few shares quicker than expected in an hour, than you did last time.
Variance can be quiet abit higher than predictable diff 1 shares, when doing diff 32 shares.

nibor

sr. member

Activity: 438

Merit: 291

Just started using this pool.

Have been getting 0.00064245 per share (x32) which seemed right to me (1/2440643 x 50 x 0.98 x 32).

But for an hour today (12:08 -> 13:09 GMT) was getting 0.00071569. Which is great! But I assume was an error?

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

I think keeping it simple has worked out quiet well.

nibor

sr. member

Activity: 438

Merit: 291

I would put top of your list the ability to email if miner is down.

You could use the username for that too - or the password.

e.g. if password was:
[email protected]

You would email that address if miner submitted no shares for over 10 mins. Could also email when user get payments.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Trying out difficulty 20 for my my mining rigs (CM1) and difficulty 2 for my testing laptop.
Seems to be performing okay.

Might try higher difficulty later on my CM1 since luck with variance seems to be pretty good on the CM1's so with a higher difficulty, it could swing a lot further.

Good quick change there, seems to work no bother, what I found funny is sometimes I notice the default changing. Is it possible that people asking for a different difficult from default temporary are changing it?

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

What software is compatible with this pool?

Edit: Nevermind, figured it out. This article is helpful.

I also made a new article documenting the future of mining: Higher difficulty pooled mining. I'm no miner, so the page needs some serious work. Also, adding some links would be helpful.

Tittiez

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

This looks really good. I have 450MH/s, I might try difficulty 2, or maybe just difficulty 1. The simplicity of the pool is what attracts me.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Quote from: fireduck on August 30, 2012, 09:53:49 AM

Quote from: fireduck on August 30, 2012, 08:27:02 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 30, 2012, 05:39:54 AM

How complicated is it to have multiple different share difficulties run from the same pool, and in your case I presume the same server?

Not very. The difficulty is just sent out with the work unit and the result if submitted by the miner is checked to see if it has at least that difficulty. Might need to plumb some new variables through but shouldn't be a big deal. I might try to get that going today.

I've done it. I put the parameter in the username, it was just easier to ship that around. See http://hhtt.1209k.com/:

If you would like a difficulty other than the one listed above, use a username like:

1FDkoGo8o9tmXD4cYpAqBZeWACJiYjMm3x_4
This specifies the address '1FDkoGo8o9tmXD4cYpAqBZeWACJiYjMm3x' with a difficulty of 4.

Allowable range is 1 to 65536.

Later I will implement a sliding scale of fee for difficulties. (More fees for lower difficulty).

Nicely done! Once home I will start experimenting with this.
Are you keeping tabs on how popular specific difficulties are?

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Well done at being the first to implement this.

I quote from another thread I posted if people are trying to decide what difficulty to set:

Quote from: -ck on August 30, 2012, 05:35:12 AM

To not make variance any more painful at high hashrates, make the share return rate proportional to the square root of the hashrate instead of a constant. So a 1 GH/s miner currently returns a share every 4.2 seconds - if you make the 1GH miners difficulty 10 as a baseline, then you make 10GH miners sqrt(10) * 10 ~ diff 30. And you make 100GH miners sqrt(100) * 10 ~ diff 100.

fireduck

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 251

Quote from: fireduck on August 30, 2012, 08:27:02 AM

Quote from: Lethos on August 30, 2012, 05:39:54 AM

How complicated is it to have multiple different share difficulties run from the same pool, and in your case I presume the same server?

Not very. The difficulty is just sent out with the work unit and the result if submitted by the miner is checked to see if it has at least that difficulty. Might need to plumb some new variables through but shouldn't be a big deal. I might try to get that going today.

I've done it. I put the parameter in the username, it was just easier to ship that around. See http://hhtt.1209k.com/:

If you would like a difficulty other than the one listed above, use a username like:

1FDkoGo8o9tmXD4cYpAqBZeWACJiYjMm3x_4
This specifies the address '1FDkoGo8o9tmXD4cYpAqBZeWACJiYjMm3x' with a difficulty of 4.

Allowable range is 1 to 65536.

Later I will implement a sliding scale of fee for difficulties. (More fees for lower difficulty).

fireduck

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 251

Quote from: Lethos on August 30, 2012, 05:39:54 AM

How complicated is it to have multiple different share difficulties run from the same pool, and in your case I presume the same server?

Not very. The difficulty is just sent out with the work unit and the result if submitted by the miner is checked to see if it has at least that difficulty. Might need to plumb some new variables through but shouldn't be a big deal. I might try to get that going today.

Lethos

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Keep it Simple. Every Bit Matters.

Quote from: fireduck on August 29, 2012, 12:28:02 PM

Quote from: crazyates on August 29, 2012, 12:17:40 PM

That's what I thought, but your other post kinda made it sound like that could be possible.

Ah, I was talking about if a pool allowed users to pick their own difficulty. In that case there would be a possibility of a user finding a good hash and then claiming it as a higher difficulty share to get more credit for it.

How complicated is it to have multiple different share difficulties run from the same pool, and in your case I presume the same server?

fireduck

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 251

Quote from: crazyates on August 29, 2012, 12:17:40 PM

That's what I thought, but your other post kinda made it sound like that could be possible.

Ah, I was talking about if a pool allowed users to pick their own difficulty. In that case there would be a possibility of a user finding a good hash and then claiming it as a higher difficulty share to get more credit for it.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: fireduck on August 29, 2012, 12:14:37 PM

Quote from: crazyates on August 29, 2012, 12:00:40 PM

Is it even possible to mine at 1GH/s, and all diff>=32 get submitted to your pool, and any diff<32 get submitted to another pool?

Negative. For the same reason that it is impossible to mine on a pool and take any found blocks yourself.

When mining you are doing hash(DATA_FROM_POOL + NONCE + TIME). Your client changes the nonce and to a certain extent the time. The DATA_FROM_POOL includes a hash of a transaction group that includes a payment to the pool. You can't change that without invalidating the work. Pools also check that the work unit you are submitting is one they gave out.

That's what I thought, but your other post kinda made it sound like that could be possible.

Topic: [500 GH/s]HHTT -Selected Diff/Stratum/PPLNS/Paid Stales/High Availability/Tor - page 31. (Read 56546 times)