I'd like to reach out to the miners and ask for feedback on the MAX_BlOCK_ALGO_COUNT parameter. It's currently set to accept 3 blocks in a row from the same algorithm to help promote even distribution between algorithms. Is anyone seeing too many rejects from this?
At Prohashing we are losing 5.06% of the blocks we find due to the limit. Since Argentum is merge-mined, there's little reason for us to put code into our mining server that doesn't mine if we find a certain number of consecutive blocks (since the hashes are still valid for the primary coin). We just automatically adjust the number of Argentum we pay miners based upon the success rate of block submission.
I can understand your reasoning for implementing the limit, and the network is large enough (or my pool is small enough) that we aren't really affected by it. My experience is with scrypt though; I don't know how the SHA-256D people are doing.
Thanks for the feedback. I've noticed it happening most often when hash-rates are fluctuating (no surprise there), but I didn't have an idea as to the extent of it. Yesterday morning Cryptcollector noticed the blockchain had stalled for 4-5 hours and it was due to this. Not ideal at all. I have to wonder if it would smooth itself out with more miners/hashrate, but since there will be fluctuation regardless, it might be ideal to raise it to 5 or 6 MAX.
On another note, I have a working build of Coinomi with Argentum integration I'm testing right now. Everything is working well, hopefully I can push it out the door soon.
If anyone wants to test the Argentum Electrum server, here it is
https://github.com/argentumproject/electrum-arg-server. I have a 1000 transaction database I'm going to try have hosted somewhere so I can integrate it with the "Configure" script in Electrum for an easy download since building a DB from scratch takes a long time.
