I would hope that the coins with strong fundamentals will be able to survive getting hit with multi-pool traffic, however, this is certainly a new frontier, and we can't discount the possibility that we may damage a "good" coin. Then again, we have examples of forks, 51% attacks, etc with BTC, FTC and others, and those are still around even after many posted about the "critical condition" they were in at the time. Heck, BTC has had so many times in its relatively short history when it's future was thrown into question, however, thus far it's always bounced back. We will damage a small coin if we mine it with the hashpower we have, however, there are a number of ways to mitigate this, through algorithms in the coins themselves to dynamically redistributing pool hashing power so that we don't so quickly overwhelm a "small" coin. Remember how long FTC was "stuck" when the exchange rate dropped and the difficulty was crazy high? Those dedicated to it banded together and made sure transactions still went through and the coin didn't die :]
Anyways, more relevant to your issue, the "slow" miners and higher difficulty shouldn't affect payout. I know it seems that way when you're working on a share for 8 minutes and then the pool switches coins, however, unless my 2am statistics brain is shot, the probability of solving does not increase with time (The likelihood that a block WAS solved increases with time until one is, however, the instantaneous probability doesn't). If you have a miner that just received work vs one that's hashing away for 8 minutes, assuming they are otherwise identical, both have an equal likelihood of solving at any one instant in time. Otherwise it's like saying it's more likely to flip a heads after you just flipped 3 tails in a row... nope still 50/50. Sometimes a miner will take less than a second, other times it will take an hour. That's where the whole "luck" thing comes into play.
That said, there's definitely an issue in your hashing if your accepted shares dropped that much after we went to 1024. Without having experienced the same issue it's tough to hypothesize. I'll let you know tomorrow if I figure it out :] May have to fire up the 135KH/s laptop to test with to see if I can replicate it
Thanks for the history on those coins. We certainly avoided problems when the community rallied, but shit can happen fast if someone really wanted it to.
If it happens to a popular coin, or enough coins, the alt market or even BTC itself may tank until new coins with new versions of scrypt and the like, with PoW and PoS show up
Indeed, it seems possible not to trash a coin with certain algorithms tailored around them specifically, and at very least this pools stops mining EAC after around 5-10 blocks and doesn't completely trash it (accept during EAC x2, had 1-2 hour waits during the for 3-4 different blocks, though, man was that rough). It still does hurt block rates for a while and drives the price down, a double whammy shunning more people from making it a stronger coin for MC to eventually use more effectively. My only interest in calling out MC over this is also everyones interest. Profits. I just feel that decent profits over time are better than mad profits on a highway to hell, and this pool rides that line reeeeeaaaly closely, in my opinion. "With great power comes great responsibility." (lol)
On the other topic. Yeah, I can't think of anything else. Maybe my little nVidia rig would best be used on a single pool somewhere if it keeps up, because it seems to not be affecting my 290x -all- that much.
So, if I am working on a unit, and the coin switches, somehow that unit still counts? It never seems to be returned to be "accepted" after we have gone on to other coins. I derive this from the fact that it takes about the average "work unit time" after a coin switch to send in a share, e.g. the longest periods between submits are after switches. So in theory, it could take my nvidia rig up to 20 mins to send if if we never switched but once in that time. This would explain why it almost doesn't show up in my hashing graph.
My whole idea could be blown away by being able to find out exactly what happens to the current share I am working on when the coin switches.
If you do set that up, thanks much. Most of the people who haven't noticed anything have hashrates shy of 1mh/s or more, and the issues at hand seems to be my low hash rig. This is why I am not so apt to believe something non-willfully changed on my end. It's quite the coincidence in timing.
Half relevant, if I am working on a share and a block is found, does it report instantly or finish the work unit?
