Topic: [ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com - page 226. (Read 554401 times)

Not a difficult answer.  Has been answer in this thread and many other threads before it.  The MC has ~500 pages of information, a lot of it based around the question you asked.

If high rejects make you feel bad, then move along to another pool that has lower rejects.  I personally don't care if I have 99.999999% rejects as long as I am making more than I would at another pool.

Hi, I'm new here.

I've been mining from the pool for about five days, and I've been above .01 payable for a couple of days.  I'm at .023 payable now (I only run ~800 KH/s to give you an idea of time it'd take to get that high).  I haven't had a payout on the account though.  Wondering if somethings going on? I doubled checked my address and it's correct.

----------------------------------schnipp-------------------   not from me and a finetuned copy------------

Since this is a question I get asked all the time - I'm making this sticky post.

The hashrate that your miner program shows is your card hashrate - which is actual hashes per second.

The hashrate that the server shows is your 'effective' hashrate, which is based on the number of submitted shares.    Since your miner only submits work if it exceeds a certain difficulty level, the server only knows about that particular percentage of hashes you have mined.


One thing you should know, is that you really shouldn't be tuning your settings for the best hashrate.  Because the pool doesn't pay based on hashrate.   The pool pays by submitted shares, so submitted shares is what you need to maximize.

Sometimes the settings you use to achieve maximum  share rate will show a lesser actual hashrate. (on cgminer share rate is indicated by the column with the "WU: ")

So when you are tuning your settings, don't even look at the hashrate at all, just look at the submitted share rate.   Run the miner for 10 minutes, mark down what your WU rate is, then change a setting and do it again until you find sweet spot that maximizes your submitted shares

---------------------schnapp----------------------


--------------------------schnipp-------- not from me and exact copy-------------------

so what is better keeping khashes higher or keeping WU higher?

on 1070 my cards give 745kh (5 cards) but 2800-2900 total WU

and if i downclock to 1040 it gives 720kh but 3450-3500wu

(10 min run first and second)

what is better?

The WU because that is the final thing the pools see. That is the shares your submitting. Higher amount of shares = more of a chunk of the block you will get.

For a test to see if I say is true, get on one of those pools that has the worker info refreshed regularly. You will see that the numbers usually reported are equal to your WU rate and not your hash rate.

Also, over time your WU will go down to become a steady output without much change up and down. Usually I let it run a few hours to see where it settles and then tweek when needed.
-------------------------------------------schnapp-------------------

so keep im mind :

The hashrate you will see at the pool is not the hashrate you see at your miner (cgminer) it will be the WU-rate:

example: my miners show a combined hash-rate of : 2.71 Mh/s but the pool only shows 2.5 Mh/s (over all the time)
This 2.5Mh/s are exactly  my combined WU-rates: (here 2.564 MH/s)

From this rate i have to submit the reject- and stale-rate.....do get my payable hashrate...........

The optimum would be your WU-Rate is 95% of your hashrate and Reject and stale-rate = 0%



Sorry for the long post

Damn hope Terk doesn't throw the towel in with the ddos attack delaying the new servers. He gets ahead of one, only to work on another and then the DDOs hits.

He has a lot of patience.

Can I follow up on this with a query to the experts ??

Am I correct in thinking that CleverMining on the BTC/Mh/Day measure uses the *accepted*, rather than the total submitted shares to give the specific profit number? If that is the case, then comparing this measure on something like poolpicker is going to artificially inflate the "profitability" of the this pool over others, since the reject rate is noticeably (but understandably) higher at CleverMining, we should really be comparing on a pure miner hash rate measure (assuming a given rig). Fundamentally, profit is how much BTC you get for how much hash you throw out for a given mining setup to a given pool. Rejects come from poor miner setup (nothing to do with the pool) and the coin being mined (nothing to do with the pool either). BUT rejects are still important if >few percent and if the reject level differs between pools then pool to pool comparisons on money/accepted is not the full picture.

I am running / have run on Middlecoin, HashCows, wafflePool in the past, and enough to worry about profitability. Want to try CleverMining once the eu server arrives (my ping is a bit to high (plus the reject issue) to make me leave bleed off some rigs from WafflePool at the mo)

WafflePool have a super low reject level, and a solid eu server, but they mine bigger coins, but the OP suggests changes to hit sub 20 diff coins, so hanging in there for now. CleverMining *seem* to have the really smart coinswitcher/trader and report a good BTC/Mh/day BUT is it really measurably better (10% say) than any other auto-trading pool for X Mh/s of hash resource

My gut feeling is there isn't that much in it at the end of the day (its all factored in etc..), and mostly we are just better off having worthy competitors to middlecoin and have operators that are technically smart people, put the hours in, stay in touch, and make mining a collaborative activity rather than a bitch-fest. Thank god for that.

Thoughts anybody ?

This is decribing the situation exactly

https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgjfOw3x.gif&t=537&c=9J2lTtRqOrItAw



You can decide which way you want to go.......

Check middlecoin/clevermining/whatelse one week and decide.........or just swinging arround

I have mining single coins, trying middlecoin this and that (during the time building my rigs)

I'am now here, and i will stay even with 10% rejects because
it is not the earnings/Mh at all it is also the service/information/response you will get from the pool-owner!

Just do not forget to put one or two fail-over-pools in your config-file (ex: a doge/feather/litecon-pool or even a second multi-pool)
otherwise there  maybee more income-lost (during a non connected night) as the reject-rate 

My point was, all other things being equal (ie BTC per MH/s per day elsewhere being marginally HIGHER than CleverMining although statistical data has not been collected for sufficient duration to list this as a definite factor yet) the reject rate at CleverMining is 5-10% ABOVE any other pool tested (whether multipool or "traditional" mining).  That is 5-10% MORE than other multipool mining pools.  So yes 5-10% may be acceptable for Multipool however whatever the reject rate may be, my expereince is that CleverMining I get a baseline reject rate (as one would expect with any pool)  PLUS an additional 5-10%. With everything else being equal (ie BTC per MH/s per day), if there is a choice between 5-10% and 1% reject rate, which is the better choice?  Not an overly difficult decision.

Note that config in all cases is identical apart from the pool URL.  The only difference is the decreased clockspeed on CleverMining to lower reject rate.  Without this speed reduction the reject rate of a reject rate of 5-10% could be doubled, peaking to treble these values.  Once again NOTE  these changes have not been necessary anywhere else.  I am not trying to do anything with my cards on CleverMining than has worked at all the other pools.  So I can tweak and tune and have specific settings and I have done so experimentally with the 5-10% being the best achieved.  Alternatively I can take the same earnings rate, keep the 0.5Mh I can lose in rejects and using the exact same config I started with (prior to CleverMining tweaks), go to any of the other multipools or traditional pools.

If you look at the way the pool sizes at MiddleCoin, CleverMining and Wafflepool have shifted during the past month you`ll see that something is causing people not to move to CleverMining. Terk is undoubtedly doing a stellar job and having spoken to him a couple of times he is an agreeable fellow especially considering the stress he is under.  However the fact remains .. people can micro-manage their configs and optimise specifically for ClerverMining but why would they bother when they can simply go elsewhere, achieve the same results and not have to bother with this performance tuning?  Alot of people use Multipools as a "fire and forget" solution because they no longer wish to continually monitor pools, markets, prices etc nor do they wish to be perpetually tweaking their rigs to suit the characteristics of individual pools/currencies.  Instead they pick a multipool which allows use of a standard config, with no need for further effort required.  In this fashion they can draw a decent earnings rate from their hashpower.  Excellent, job well done, except .. to get the best out of CleverMining at the moment additional tweaking and tuning does seem to be necessary.

Rejects can be caused by coins with faster times, such as if you were mining a coin with 30 second blocktimes, you would get a lot more rejects than a coin with 60 second target time. Its not always because of latency or slow servers at a pool.

  I preffer more profit of course.  My point is I'm new on mining, I started some weeks ago. I've spend some money with 3 GPU and I try to find a good server that gives me the maximum profit. I've tried many. Now i'm between wafflepool  and here, on both web pages you can see the daily profit BTC / 1MH,   I assume those numbers are with 0% rejects.   So if for example here I see 10% more proffit than other pool, but here I have 10% more rejects, then I assume both are same profit, right?

different coins ? faster switching ? different algorithm?



I think Terk mentioned it before:

Mining on a coin with 200% to LTC with 20% rejects is better (gives you 160% to LTC (and a bad feeling with your reject rate))
as mining a coin with 150% to LTC with only 5% rejects  (gives you 142,5% to LTC (and a good feeling with your reject rate))

What do you prefer ?

  What I dont understand is why I have 1.5% rejects on wafflepool and here I have 10%  with exactly same configuration.   I just wait for the EU server to see if something changes.

5-10% is acceptable in a coin switching pool.  On a super fast coin, rejects can be upwards of 20%.  Terk has figured that all into his algorithm.


This:



Has got to stop.

Edit: My rejects on MC were ~7.5% or so for months on end.

Hi

for me it is the same....... i recognized a lot of rejects and stales (starting here on monday) and i tuned (cgminer.conf) my 3 rigs (2.5MH/s)
and it went down from nearly 10%-12% to about 6.5%-7%

This night i tuned the overclocking of my card 5% back (saves a little power/here in germany power is expensive)
i lost about 85kh/s and save about 65 Watt/h.
The rigs a running more stable and the temperature will be rising more and more at my side.

and what should i say:

16hours running:

4337 submitted shares
178 rejected (4,1%)
43 stale (1,%)

Now thats  about 5,1%  thats fair for a multipool and not more than on middlecoin or elsewhere.

So please please do not point to Terk (he is doing a great job) just try to solve the problem at your side first

Great to be here................and go on Terk, it is nice to see a pool that transparent like here...............

Hint : Try
 --expiry 1 --scan-time 1 queue 0

P.S.: It is not that exact because this night my rigs switch two times to middlecoin due to the ddos-attack here....so maybee the reject rate would be even better.........we will see

People can't be bother to read a thread, and you think they will read ya post vaporx? :|

They'll see ya post and go TLDR.

If you want people to read, you need to be a lot shorter.

Anyway, people will have you believe the problem is on your end not the site. Even though countless people are complaining, granted tho they seem to not understand cgminer/sgminer etc. So I can appreciate the other point.

I'm sitting on about 2.5% and in AU.

Try
 --expiry 13 --scan-time 1 --queue 0
or
 --expiry 1 --scantime 1 --queue 0

Also I suggest people switch to sgminer, use the zuikkis kernel and understand what the options do that they are using. Pro tip: sgminer --help

CleverMining has definitely reduced rejects considerably but I still find it a major issue.  I have to dial back clockspeed on my cards (lowering my hash a little) and even then I routinely average 5 - 10%.  This is not something I`ve ever experienced mining elsewhere, whether mining currency or in another multipool.  I have just switched from CleverMining to another multipool to get some stats to make a decent compqarison, however for the moment I can`t make a decent comparison other than to say the earnings rates appear similar with the edge going to the new pool.

One thing that is clear however is that on CleverMining I am showing a reject rate in the region of 5% - 10% with no shortage of spikes considerably over this.  On a couple of other multipools I
On the subject of rejects at CleverMining, I took another look at my stats in an attempt to determine just how much of a factor the elevated reject rate on CleverMining is.  Firstly, I appreciate that hashrate does not equal earnings and that ultimately it is the bottom line, the actual returns, that determine successful mining.  Unfortunately at the moment I do not have extensive returns data to make a full comparison to CleverMining in terms of earnings however my experience so far is that I am certainly no worse off and I may be a fair bit better off elsewhere.

The main factor which impacts CleverMining so heavily is the extremely high reject rate experienced at CleverMining. I have mined for a number of months, both directly on pools supporting a wide variety of currencies and on other multipool pools.  I have mined on pools using servers in Europe, the USA, South America and Asia.  Through all of these pools located around the globe I have never experienced a rate anything close to the reported rate at CleverMining.  I`ve never even come close to half of that rate if truth be told.  So whilst BTC per day per Mh/s is how earnings are quantified, if that input is reduced by rejects in the region of 10% then that is a marked factor in profit calculation.

To put some nunmbers into all of this I run two rigs, one running 4 x R9280x Saphire Vapor-X and one running 2 x R9280x Asus DirectCU  II.  Under normal mining conditions I get 750kh/s out of each Vapor-X and 740 out of each Asus for a total hashrate of approximately 4480kh/s.  Before even getting to BTC earnings per Mh/s per day I looked at the Accepted Hashrate that the pools receive from me.  This is where I see a 10% difference in my inout hashrate and so inevitably in my ourput earnings.

Due to the increased reject rate on CleverMining I have been forced to reduce my GPU-Engine clockspeed otherwise rejects rates are considerably higher.  I should stress again that in all the mining I have done elsewhere I have never had to do this previously.  Even with this speed reduction I still see rejects of 5 - 10% although in fairness this figure has decreased and is certainly much better than it used to be.  Nontheless, decreasing overclocking?!?!?  Reducing speed?!?  What madness is this!?!?

Accepted hash on CleverMining is calculated as
4480 - 50kh/s (reduced clockspeed) - (reject rate 5 - 10% 220kh/s to 450kh/s - average 335kh/s) 335 = CleverMining Accepted Hashrate 4095

Accepted hash on an Alternate Multipool is calculated as
4480 - (reject rate under 1%) - 45kh/s = Alternate Multipool Accepted Hashrate 4435

Wilst the difference is not monumental, neither is it insignificant.  In very broad terms it is a 10% overhead not evident elsewhere.  Using an identical config, changing only addresses, I am unable to replicate this reject rate elsewhere despite trying a number of pools (both direct currency mining or other multipools).  Over the short period I have been collecting stats on the alternative pool there has been a marginally better performance than on Clevermining however as stated it would be unfair to attempt any form of categorisation at this stage with so little data available.

One HUGE PLUS for CleverMining which is worthy of mention is how accessible and approchable CleverMining is.  In the form of Terk, CleverMining has an easily accessible, eminently approachable internet presence providing updates and feedback on a daily basis.  Terk is regularly visible and responsive on IRC and often deals with potentially awkward questions with great tact and diplomacy.  For this he should be congratulated wholeheartedly.  Other pools would do well to note this critical facet of the operation and duplicate it.

Anyway to sum up, whilst rejects is not the be all and end all of mining and earnings is the critical measure of success, where earnings are measured in BTC per Mh/s per day, to lost a constant portion of that Mh/s per day is factor people are rightly considering.  Of course individual mileage may vary and as always it is down to the individual to make their own decisions.  However I just wanted to add my perspective to the mix.





 

Oh man I did something dumb, I copied the section of cgminer.conf for wafflecoin so I could try out clevermining, but I left in the _miner in the username. I'm not sure why it accepted shares despite me putting an invalid address. But check it out, it made stats for it!

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1raTtywAdbascZtk1E65U7wqns9FZ8UCR_work (note the _workername at the end)
http://www.clevermining.com/users/1raTtywAdbascZtk1E65U7wqns9FZ8UCR normal stats

So I'm wondering, is that a supported thing? Will it payout to my address by having _randomtext at the end of the address?
I'll be ok with the loss, it was my fault, and was only a few hours on my slowest worker, but I thought the pool owner would want to know about this in case its unintended that it accepts shares from invalid bitcoin addresses in the username.

Thanks

CGWatcher? works good for me, restart miner/computer if needed

Good thing that profits are now back up, I hope it increases even more!  

Such profit.