Loving this pool so far.. Great job h2odysee.. if you need any info from me, let me know..
I show 13% stales but if my Balance is correct that is showing on your web site, I am very happy so far..
Topic: [ANN] profit switching auto-exchanging pool - www.middlecoin.com - page 533. (Read 829908 times)
July 22, 2013, 12:19:35 PM
July 22, 2013, 12:14:57 PM
3.1% stales on my other rig... just to high
4.6% one this rig
lower the difficulty for 24 hours i know it will go down...
or invest in better hardware
he wont do vardiff as it would overload his server... so its us miners that are suffering
4.6% one this rig
lower the difficulty for 24 hours i know it will go down...
or invest in better hardware
Would it be difficult to implement a variable difficulty? Then we could rule that out as a cause.
he wont do vardiff as it would overload his server... so its us miners that are suffering
h2odysee > I really like the idea of this pool as well 
I'll mine on it for a few days, at least, to give it a decent try. I'm still at about 15% rejected, and looking at the hashrates and latencies posted above, I guess my 330 Kh/s hashrate indeed is the culprit. Unfortunately, I can't really increase it...
Earlier you mentioned that you think the ping, not the difficulty causes rejects, but I think it might be the other way around. I send in less than a share per minute, while blocks are being found quite frequently. A latency of 200 ms should not be that much of a problem, right? Would it be difficult to implement a variable difficulty? Then we could rule that out as a cause.
I'll mine on it for a few days, at least, to give it a decent try. I'm still at about 15% rejected, and looking at the hashrates and latencies posted above, I guess my 330 Kh/s hashrate indeed is the culprit. Unfortunately, I can't really increase it...Earlier you mentioned that you think the ping, not the difficulty causes rejects, but I think it might be the other way around. I send in less than a share per minute, while blocks are being found quite frequently. A latency of 200 ms should not be that much of a problem, right? Would it be difficult to implement a variable difficulty? Then we could rule that out as a cause.
Ping from Toronto, Canada seems excellent
Pinging middlecoin.com [54.212.90.196] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=76ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=47
Pinging middlecoin.com [54.212.90.196] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=76ms TTL=47
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=47
Hi Dev!
First of all congrats for this Pool! I love the idea! I have 25.000 kH/s right now. Im testing with 2.900 kH/s.
Here is my ping results:
PING middlecoin.com (54.212.90.196): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=0 ttl=43 time=243.156 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=1 ttl=43 time=258.516 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=2 ttl=43 time=285.351 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=3 ttl=43 time=308.798 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=4 ttl=43 time=190.596 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=5 ttl=43 time=235.395 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=6 ttl=43 time=201.303 ms
^C
--- middlecoin.com ping statistics ---
7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 190.596/246.159/308.798/39.346 ms
PING from Latam (Venezuela).
And here is my stales/get results:
GETS: 1638
REJECTS: 77
2.92%.
10 hours working on this pool.
If you improve this pool, Im sure you will get a lot of clients! Including all my farm!
Thanks
First of all congrats for this Pool! I love the idea! I have 25.000 kH/s right now. Im testing with 2.900 kH/s.
Here is my ping results:
PING middlecoin.com (54.212.90.196): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=0 ttl=43 time=243.156 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=1 ttl=43 time=258.516 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=2 ttl=43 time=285.351 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=3 ttl=43 time=308.798 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=4 ttl=43 time=190.596 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=5 ttl=43 time=235.395 ms
64 bytes from 54.212.90.196: icmp_seq=6 ttl=43 time=201.303 ms
^C
--- middlecoin.com ping statistics ---
7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 190.596/246.159/308.798/39.346 ms
PING from Latam (Venezuela).
And here is my stales/get results:
GETS: 1638
REJECTS: 77
2.92%.
10 hours working on this pool.
If you improve this pool, Im sure you will get a lot of clients! Including all my farm!
Thanks
That's pretty bad 
If anyone on the west coast is getting those kind of rejected stats, please let me know. If not, I'll assume it's location based, and maybe put some servers up around the world if the pool gets popular.
If anyone on the west coast is getting those kind of rejected stats, please let me know. If not, I'll assume it's location based, and maybe put some servers up around the world if the pool gets popular.
Switzerland here, getting a crazy amount of rejects (~30%)
Edit: Dropped to 20% now
Edit: 15%
I make around 9-10 LTC per day with 6900khs. Tried pool with 2300mhs (as stated above) and I am nowhere near making 3 LTC per day. Till some impovement have to stay on manual course (yes, I switch coins manually, multiminer etc bugs big time losing my money). Hope your idea shall survive, I would pay 5% fee for pool like this. Even 7% would be fair, if reward would be proportional.
9 to 10 LTC at your hashrate you would have to be mining at 750 difficulty or be really lucky
Sounds neat. Hopping on board with 1150 kh/s for a few days and will report back
more problem is that cgminer 3.3.1 frezzes onece on 4x 7950 machine, looks like it does not like stalls from the server
Use CGWatcher. It restarts cgminer every time it freezes.
My ping ~200ms from EU, rejects on 2x 7950 is ~5%, rejects on 4x7950 is 9-10%, more problem is that cgminer 3.3.1 frezzes onece on 4x 7950 machine, looks like it does not like stalls from the server
At a stroke, this basically obsoletes CryptoSwitcher. Nice job!
If anyone is using the load-balance option in cgminer, I believe your secondary pool will restart your primary pool when it detects a new block. That might cause stale shares.
hes mining at 330kh/s and the pool difficulty is 512...........
thats the problem.
my ping test
Pinging middlecoin.com [54.212.90.196] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=186ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=42
Ping statistics for 54.212.90.196:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 186ms, Maximum = 207ms, Average = 199ms
thats the problem.
my ping test
Pinging middlecoin.com [54.212.90.196] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=186ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=42
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=42
Ping statistics for 54.212.90.196:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 186ms, Maximum = 207ms, Average = 199ms
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=44
I believe that's the issue.
It's exacerbated by the fact that my pool mines coins with fast blocks. For example, right now I think your stale rate will increase, because the network diff is currently only 6.5k.
Edit: That said, other people are having stale issues as well, who don't have high ping times.
Sure! I've done it three times with similar results. Here's one of the results:
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=44
Ping statistics for 54.212.90.196:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 201ms, Maximum = 205ms, Average = 203ms
I now have 6 rejected and 34 accepted, so about 15%.
I've done it three times with similar results. Here's one of the results:Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=44
Reply from 54.212.90.196: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=44
Ping statistics for 54.212.90.196:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 201ms, Maximum = 205ms, Average = 203ms
I now have 6 rejected and 34 accepted, so about 15%.
I've only got 330 Kh/s, but I'll try the pool for a while. I've now got 3 shares rejected and 17 accepted, so I do hope that improves a bit
Can you ping middlecoin.com and tell me what you get?
I've only got 330 Kh/s, but I'll try the pool for a while. I've now got 3 shares rejected and 17 accepted, so I do hope that improves a bit
I believe the high stale rate over the past hour or so has been because of server load. I upped the cpu priority of the current coin, and suspended some lower profit coins. Hopefully that will help.
No thanks on the server. For security reasons, and that I need it to be hosted close to the ley lines, like Amazon where I'm at now. I am looking at hosting alternatives though, if anyone has recommendations. DigitalOcean? Rackspace?
No thanks on the server. For security reasons, and that I need it to be hosted close to the ley lines, like Amazon where I'm at now. I am looking at hosting alternatives though, if anyone has recommendations. DigitalOcean? Rackspace?
im getting 2.7% rejects because of the high difficulty
where as on my other miner with wemineltc its only 0.6%
profits been good on 1600Kh/s its given me 0.03 BTC in 10 hours already where as i will only mine 0.04 BTC in 24 hours mining LTC
ive switched my other rig over for now another 2000Kh/s
i would like the difficulty to decease.... do you know how much your server can handle?
i have a old blade server with 2 quad cpus and 10gb ram and im in the UK if you want to spread the load
where as on my other miner with wemineltc its only 0.6%
profits been good on 1600Kh/s its given me 0.03 BTC in 10 hours already where as i will only mine 0.04 BTC in 24 hours mining LTC
ive switched my other rig over for now another 2000Kh/s
i would like the difficulty to decease.... do you know how much your server can handle?
i have a old blade server with 2 quad cpus and 10gb ram and im in the UK if you want to spread the load
I think what he means man, is people with slower cards, may not get shares submitted for coins with faster block times. No shares, no payout. I have had similiar issues in P2Pools. VARDIFF exists for a reason
I vote +1 for VARDIFF. admin please implement it in your pool.
Jump to: