Topic: [ANN] Puppet Master. Earn (much) more than 110% PPS. (Read 10198 times)
The problem with flooding requests in failover-only with cgminer has been fixed. Highly recommend upgrading to 2.6.1 if you are using this option (which most puppet master clients are).
watching 
This is a boring thread to watch Im afraid. No 50 pages of drama explaining why which server was down when, why rejects where high or payments delayed. Ill leave it up to you do decide wether that is because no one is using it, or because Puppet Master "just works".
That's the plain truth
Don't make me take off my shoes! Now I know who was mining bitlc via BBE... Told you it was not perfect!
I just saw this thread today. P4 and I go way back. I would say more but I have to go save my crappy proxy!
I just saw this thread today. P4 and I go way back. I would say more but I have to go save my crappy proxy!
watching
This is a boring thread to watch Im afraid. No 50 pages of drama explaining why which server was down when, why rejects where high or payments delayed. Ill leave it up to you do decide wether that is because no one is using it, or because Puppet Master "just works".
This jab is wonderful.
watching
This is a boring thread to watch Im afraid. No 50 pages of drama explaining why which server was down when, why rejects where high or payments delayed. Ill leave it up to you do decide wether that is because no one is using it, or because Puppet Master "just works".
'indeed' - chaching!
kind regards
watching
This is a boring thread to watch Im afraid. No 50 pages of drama explaining why which server was down when, why rejects where high or payments delayed. Ill leave it up to you do decide wether that is because no one is using it, or because Puppet Master "just works".
watching
After setting up all my miners, I noticed that one of them started with a very high fee balance compared to any of my other miners. The balance was over 2000 shares right after the miner showed up on the list. I'm just curious whether this is working as intended, since all the other miners (even including the obscured ones) have much lower fee balances.
I understood that the fee balance grows steadily by 1 share for every 20 shares a user has submitted to his own pool accounts. However, this miner that had a fee balance of over 2000 right away had already been mining for about a day and half at ~1400MH/s before I set up the port forward. I only restarted it afterwards to change my api settings and add the pools, but the old settings allowed read-only access too. Could Puppet Master have picked those 40k+ shares that I had submitted before actually using it, and calculated them on the fee? At least the math would add up. In that case, the initial fee would be uncalled for, and for some other users, this problem might be even worse.
I understood that the fee balance grows steadily by 1 share for every 20 shares a user has submitted to his own pool accounts. However, this miner that had a fee balance of over 2000 right away had already been mining for about a day and half at ~1400MH/s before I set up the port forward. I only restarted it afterwards to change my api settings and add the pools, but the old settings allowed read-only access too. Could Puppet Master have picked those 40k+ shares that I had submitted before actually using it, and calculated them on the fee? At least the math would add up. In that case, the initial fee would be uncalled for, and for some other users, this problem might be even worse.
You guessed right. Most new users that join have very recently restarted cgminer so we are talking about a handful of shares, if that, and even then I usually manually deduct the amount of "old" shares from the fees; in your case, I was asleep and your machine had been running for days, which is why the above happened. Once puppetmaster collected the initial stats, restarting cgminer no longer helps, as ppm keeps a rolling history.
But fear not, its all in the db, whatever you paid in fees is credited, Ill reset your stats.
After setting up all my miners, I noticed that one of them started with a very high fee balance compared to any of my other miners. The balance was over 2000 shares right after the miner showed up on the list. I'm just curious whether this is working as intended, since all the other miners (even including the obscured ones) have much lower fee balances.
I understood that the fee balance grows steadily by 1 share for every 20 shares a user has submitted to his own pool accounts. However, this miner that had a fee balance of over 2000 right away had already been mining for about a day and half at ~1400MH/s before I set up the port forward. I only restarted it afterwards to change my api settings and add the pools, but the old settings allowed read-only access too. Could Puppet Master have picked those 40k+ shares that I had submitted before actually using it, and calculated them on the fee? At least the math would add up. In that case, the initial fee would be uncalled for, and for some other users, this problem might be even worse.
I understood that the fee balance grows steadily by 1 share for every 20 shares a user has submitted to his own pool accounts. However, this miner that had a fee balance of over 2000 right away had already been mining for about a day and half at ~1400MH/s before I set up the port forward. I only restarted it afterwards to change my api settings and add the pools, but the old settings allowed read-only access too. Could Puppet Master have picked those 40k+ shares that I had submitted before actually using it, and calculated them on the fee? At least the math would add up. In that case, the initial fee would be uncalled for, and for some other users, this problem might be even worse.
Wish it wasnt so cloudy, then I would have more photons to generate electrons to generate bitcoins
kind regards
kind regards
I love being a puppet !
Nice work p4man.
kind regards
Nice work p4man.
kind regards
Yeah for sure, id say hes nearly perfected hopping.
Why "nearly perfected"? 150 - 200% PPS without you having to manage anything or spend hours keeping an eye on pools to check their html doesn't change, then editing the regex when it does? I haven't used it but if it does everything as advertised, I'd say it's as good as it can get.
Though I maybe shouldn't say this 
I wrote a hopping script for the API before the version with switchpool was even released.
While writing the API code change to include 'switchpool' I immediately thought of this and thus tried it out straight away.
Worked easily enough ... and was a simple test of the change
It's easy to identify ~50% of blocks coz they say where they came from, it's the other ~50% that can be a little tricky - you need to be connected to each pools 'wallet' and see which one told you about the block first and also handle small pools/solo that come through another larger pool - however, this could be handled by knowing the wallet addresses of the pools you are hopping - and that can be done with tools like: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88584.20 (unless it's a new address every time)
I wrote a hopping script for the API before the version with switchpool was even released.
While writing the API code change to include 'switchpool' I immediately thought of this and thus tried it out straight away.
Worked easily enough ... and was a simple test of the change
It's easy to identify ~50% of blocks coz they say where they came from, it's the other ~50% that can be a little tricky - you need to be connected to each pools 'wallet' and see which one told you about the block first and also handle small pools/solo that come through another larger pool - however, this could be handled by knowing the wallet addresses of the pools you are hopping - and that can be done with tools like: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88584.20 (unless it's a new address every time)
Yeah for sure, id say hes nearly perfected hopping.
Why "nearly perfected"? 150 - 200% PPS without you having to manage anything or spend hours keeping an eye on pools to check their html doesn't change, then editing the regex when it does? I haven't used it but if it does everything as advertised, I'd say it's as good as it can get.
Yeah for sure, id say hes nearly perfected hopping.
Glad to hear P2man's getting some coin for all the work he's done.
I like it a lot so far. We have been pretty dang lucky recently. Seeing 150-200% pps. More people comin on board nearly daily! Will contiue to see how it goes
How is this going for people? What sort of returns are you getting?
I'm thinking of joining it this week.
Phil
I'm thinking of joining it this week.
Phil
Quote
The request "it would be nice if you implemented it in the same way." would be the same as me telling you how to write your pool hopping software and expecting you to change it ...
Ill have to try your changes later (or if some 2.5 users want to chime in, please do), but just to be clear: Im not saying who should define the API, I would just like to see both forks implement it the same way as much as possible, to make it easier for everyone. I know you and luke wont get through the same door, but I was contacted by Luke shortly after making this announcement, and I told him the exact same thing: please make whatever change you make to BFGminer compatible with cgminer. I think the fork was unfortunate, and still hope BFGminer and CGminer can be merged again eventually, but even if not, there is no benefit to anyone if the API implementations are incompatible.
Also, what was the exact UTC date/time he contacted you? ... just curious
Quote
The request "it would be nice if you implemented it in the same way." would be the same as me telling you how to write your pool hopping software and expecting you to change it ...
Ill have to try your changes later (or if some 2.5 users want to chime in, please do), but just to be clear: Im not saying who should define the API, I would just like to see both forks implement it the same way as much as possible, to make it easier for everyone. I know you and luke wont get through the same door, but I was contacted by Luke shortly after making this announcement, and I told him the exact same thing: please make whatever change you make to BFGminer compatible with cgminer. I think the fork was unfortunate, and still hope BFGminer and CGminer can be merged again eventually, but even if not, there is no benefit to anyone if the API implementations are incompatible.
Jump to: