i5 650 with 3 threads (~6kh/s)
e2140 with 1 threads (~2.2kh/s)
atom 230 with 2 threads (~1kh/s)
Topic: [ANN] The First Litecoin PPS Pool (litecoinpool.org) - page 77. (Read 228407 times)
Nice to support PPS i added few small miners
i5 650 with 3 threads (~6kh/s)
e2140 with 1 threads (~2.2kh/s)
atom 230 with 2 threads (~1kh/s)
i5 650 with 3 threads (~6kh/s)
e2140 with 1 threads (~2.2kh/s)
atom 230 with 2 threads (~1kh/s)
Hi,
On your site you said this:
IMO You should change it to "65536 is the average number of shares to be computed in order to solve a block on difficulty 1". As you set the pool's small target to 16 bit, it takes 65536 shares to find a block on average. So, the way the earning are calculated should based on shares. The figures are just happened to be the same, as 65536(hashes/share) * 65536(shares/block) = 4294967296 = 2^32(hashes/block).
Just think, if you change the small target to 15 bit, the effective difficulty for miners are actually decreased, thus more shares are required to solve a block(131072), and to find a share you only need 32768 hashes. In that case the PPS should be 47.5 LTC / (131072 × Current Difficulty), not multiplied by 32768 on the denominator.
On your site you said this:
Quote
(In case you are wondering, 65536 is the average number of hashes to be computed in order to find a share. This is not the same...
IMO You should change it to "65536 is the average number of shares to be computed in order to solve a block on difficulty 1". As you set the pool's small target to 16 bit, it takes 65536 shares to find a block on average. So, the way the earning are calculated should based on shares. The figures are just happened to be the same, as 65536(hashes/share) * 65536(shares/block) = 4294967296 = 2^32(hashes/block).
Just think, if you change the small target to 15 bit, the effective difficulty for miners are actually decreased, thus more shares are required to solve a block(131072), and to find a share you only need 32768 hashes. In that case the PPS should be 47.5 LTC / (131072 × Current Difficulty), not multiplied by 32768 on the denominator.
Thank you for pointing that out. Yes, I am aware that It would be more correct to write "(4294967296 / 65536) = 65536 is the average number of hashes to be computed in order to find a share". I just didn't want to make things look too complex. But you are right, it may sound misleading. I have rephrased that part.
Hi,
On your site you said this:
IMO You should change it to "65536 is the average number of shares to be computed in order to solve a block on difficulty 1". As you set the pool's small target to 16 bit, it takes 65536 shares to find a block on average. So, the way the earning are calculated should based on shares. The figures are just happened to be the same, as 65536(hashes/share) * 65536(shares/block) = 4294967296 = 2^32(hashes/block).
Just think, if you change the small target to 15 bit, the effective difficulty for miners are actually decreased, thus more shares are required to solve a block(131072), and to find a share you only need 32768 hashes. In that case the PPS should be 47.5 LTC / (131072 × Current Difficulty), not multiplied by 32768 on the denominator.
On your site you said this:
Quote
(In case you are wondering, 65536 is the average number of hashes to be computed in order to find a share. This is not the same...
IMO You should change it to "65536 is the average number of shares to be computed in order to solve a block on difficulty 1". As you set the pool's small target to 16 bit, it takes 65536 shares to find a block on average. So, the way the earning are calculated should based on shares. The figures are just happened to be the same, as 65536(hashes/share) * 65536(shares/block) = 4294967296 = 2^32(hashes/block).
Just think, if you change the small target to 15 bit, the effective difficulty for miners are actually decreased, thus more shares are required to solve a block(131072), and to find a share you only need 32768 hashes. In that case the PPS should be 47.5 LTC / (131072 × Current Difficulty), not multiplied by 32768 on the denominator.
Since nobody has done it yet, I'm launching a pure pay-per-share Litecoin pool. As you probably know, this system has several advantages:
This method results in the least possible variance for miners.
Other features include: (updated)
Since September 11, 2014, the pool supports merged mining of Dogecoin and other cryptocurrencies, resulting in higher payouts than with a regular Litecoin pool.
As of January 2018 we are merged-mining Argentum, Canada eCoin, Dogecoin, Huntercoin, Myriad, Pesetacoin, Viacoin.
https://www.litecoinpool.org/
Feedback and feature requests are very welcome!
- No penalty for orphaned blocks.
- Predictable income: you are no more subject to bad luck.
- Rewards are instantly credited to your account (you don't have to wait for a block to be solved or confirmed).
- You can be sure that the pool operator is not cheating (because you know how many shares you submit).
- Immunity to pool hopping.
This method results in the least possible variance for miners.
Other features include: (updated)
- Exclusive ultra-low-latency Stratum implementation, written in C for maximum performance
- Support for Stratum over SSL/TLS, to prevent MITM attacks
- Support for extensions to the Stratum protocol, including resume, suggest_difficulty and suggest_target
- Adaptive share difficulty (“vardiff”)
- Geographically-distributed, redundant servers
- Detailed stats updated every minute
- Detailed history of earnings and payouts
- Per-worker performance graphs
- Automatic and manual payouts
- Email notification of idle miners
- Two-factor authentication support
- Extensive JSON API and mobile interfaces
- Website and mining interface also accessible as Tor hidden services
- Lightweight interface
Since September 11, 2014, the pool supports merged mining of Dogecoin and other cryptocurrencies, resulting in higher payouts than with a regular Litecoin pool.
As of January 2018 we are merged-mining Argentum, Canada eCoin, Dogecoin, Huntercoin, Myriad, Pesetacoin, Viacoin.
https://www.litecoinpool.org/
Feedback and feature requests are very welcome!
Jump to: