Topic: [ANN][BLC] Blakecoin Blake-256 for GPU/FPGA With Merged Mined Pools Stable Net - page 42. (Read 409571 times)

Happy birthday, BLC and the Blake-256 family!

Sorry, one of the SSDs on the webserver failed.  Just got it replaced.  Both should be running now.  Thanks for noticing.

Happy 2nd birthday BLC!

http://electron.tips/ and http://www.blaketrader.com/  is down?
Do you know why? 

I think this year coming up is going to be an eye opener for a lot of people in many ways.

Blake Coin has a lot to offer.

When we make our move those who have been with us from the start of since then will be glad they were.

Happy birthday !!

2 years on and still going strong thanks for everyone's continued help and support 

lol twitter always needs more cute pictures of our feline overlords 

love the BlakeZone gif's nice one

While making unusual cat gifs earlier to post to twitter I got this idea ...........


https://j.gifs.com/ygX05B.gif

ok checking now

Edit:
EU3 rebooted and back online  

thanks for reporting the issue

EU3 seems to be unreachable.

MarSas, lol.

I see what you did there

In addition consider a few of these facts about mining:

Over time (the longer the time the closer to 100% luck tends to gravitate to) you get the same number of coins on any number of pools whether you mine on the pools with the most hash power or the least.

Obviously human nature makes most gravitate to the pools with higher hash rates but thosexwith lower hash rate hitting fewer blocks and pay those submitting shares more coins than a large pool....

Consider an avg block of blake coin is 25.2

If your pool has a total number of users μ
and hits φ blocks a day (25.2 * φ ) / μ
is the number of Blc each user will earn per day (I am assuming all users have identical / equal hashrate for this and normal flat luck for the example.

So you see the more users mining the more blocks one can expect to solve however those rewards are divided up between a greater number of users.

Again if eu pool hits 2000 blc today and you are mining and are 5% of that you will roughly earn 100 blc.
Suppose the next day you mine in LA & the whole pool earns 500 blc that day but since fewer are mining you are 20% of the pools hash rate your reward is identical.

If you read about pplns you learn it takes 4 rounds (or shifts if in use) to earn full awards.

So pool hopping with round robin puts you at a slight disadvantage vs. staying in one pool.

The other alternative i mentioned earlier is to use load balance on multiple pools. With this strategy cg miner 'attempts' to que work from several pools and balance more or less hashes to the pool(s) providing more or less work.
The reason this strategy is not good in the blake ecosystem is twofold. First getwork is NOT being used , the strantum protocol is. Thus there is very minor or no variance across pools. The second problem is that merged mined coins work tends to get 'stale' and become invalid for the auxuliary chains as each second ticks by.

The stats you see from cg miner that a new block was detected only indicate blocks of blake coin / none of the others.
If you mine like me always in verbose/debug mode the work being rolled is only blake coin also.

So you dilute your hash power this way and also the hash power of all pools you are mining on.
Also cg miner is not 'perfect' when connected to multiple pools and the bottom line is some hash power is wasted, more stale shares are submitted & fewer solves.

In mining you cannot use work from one pool and submit it to another, this is part of the protocol.

The only exception to my examples given here are when a coins difficulty is always rising quickly like bitcoin.
For bitcoin mining you gain a slight edge mining on a pool with the most hash power since on a small pool you may only hit a few blocks a week. If difficulty is always generally rising mining on a smaller pool your reward is much more impacted by bad pool luck although with good luck your rewards can be much larger.

The blake coin system will someday reach a point of adoption where difficulty is always or almost always rising .....

I suggest you read up on pplns & the read me docs with cg miner. I think you will find my conclusions correct mathematically (and they are in practice also since I have actually tested all these & other methods on the merged pools) ..... 

Sorry for the long post but I hope this fully detailed the reasons why Bluedragon747 & I are correct in the mining strategies we suggest. We want everyone and the network to work with as little waste as possible.

Further reference pplns http://www.etcwiki.org/wiki/Bitcoin:_PPLNS_vs_PPS





 

work sent to miner is unique for each pool so shares are not valid in other pools

while it sounds ideal to have all pools doing a combined round for each chain in practice its not a good idea due to some who will cheat the system if they can

what might be more practical is to have a proxy address that miners are pointed to that auto selects an active pool

like cinnamon said you could just set cgminer to do round robin of list of pools

could also have some kind of stratum pool that mines other pools think I have seen something like this

for now no plans to change setup of pools maybe once things are up and running in closed beta and we are looking at going open beta would this type of consideration make sense to spend time on

Not saying pay everyone the same, it's not a robin hood thing.

I am not a programmer, I will try to explain one more time, but it's hard for me to do typing it out.


Instead of one pool being rewarded for a block find, the payout would be spread across all four pools based on shares submitted. I am just thinking ahead to when BlakeZone gets released and those that get into the blake256 family because of the game, and will be mining while playing, most people just pick the pool with the highest hash rate to mine on. I think it would be better if it did not matter which of the four merge pools you where on, the network hash rate could in theory be spread across four pools and not have a dominant pool so a ddos attack on one pool would not be that big of an issue as far as keeping the blockchains moving, or does it even matter?

You would loose the "luck" aspect of mining.

Really what is the point of the two people mining on CG1 as I type this, haven't hit a block in over 5 hours.

I don't know if I am explaining this well enough.

Maybe I am just trying to figure out a solution to a problem that may or may not ever be an issue. 

Not sure I really understand ....

Seems like you are proposing a system that would not fairly award those submitting shares under the pplns system.

Over the long term with normal / averaged out luck a pplns system should pay equal awards to a pay per share system. This is only one of the strong points of it's design.

Yes we have a great community who work together however a proposal to change the payout system of the pools that would not be properly rewarding everyone for their submitted shares is not fair to the miners who have larger investments in mining hardware than others !!

One of the greatest things the blake coin community offers is "Fairness" and "honesty".

I admire all suggestions to improve the network however a 'robin hood' rob from the rich & give to poor (or take from the lucky to award to unlucky miners) is niether fair or honest !! lol

May I suggest when you have time you read in the bitcoin wiki or another credabile source about exactly how pooled mining works & how the different pay out models evolved over time.

Put a harder way (not meant to offend anyone) in 'real' cryptocurrency mining you get paid for 'proof of work'.

In a hypothetical parallel universe where coins are mined  in a pool with a socialist type payout every miner in the pool gets paid the same whether they run 90 gigahash for 24 hours or 3 megahash for twenty minutes.

Thankfully it is an imaginary universe.......



AD VALOREM

I was thinking of it in a different way. I will try and explain the best i can,

Bluedragon747 has four Blake Merged Pools running, is there a way to share the block reward among all four pools and all miners regardless of which pool found the block. The same way it's done for just a single pool finding a block but spread the reward among everyone as we are all working towards the same goal.


Would something like this be possible.

 

I guess it is possible to register for all pools , set up workers & adjust cg miner to mine multiple pools vs. fallover but your reward over the long term would be no greater and might be less due to more stale shares ??

Is there a way to keep the mining pools like they are but have all miners across all the pools share in the block reward regardless of which pool hit. 

who is hitting all the blocks tonight   lol   (not me , can't hit one so save my life)

moved to Atlanta and backed up should be back online soon  


Edit:
NY2/AT1 is online now  

*will resolve as at1.blakecoin.com or ny2.blakecoin.com