Topic: [ANN][POOL] ZERGPOOL.com - Multialgo, autoexchange, 0.5% fee, 250+ coins - page 4. (Read 57845 times)
June 04, 2022, 05:49:50 AM
That's ll fine and good but the pool should be using the same difficulty it tells the miner to use.
May 31, 2022, 09:38:11 PM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
You're setting sd=8 correctly, but a lower difficulty, sd=6 fails. That looks to me that is related to the limit the pool has on this number.
Quote from: zergpool.com
sd=
You may want to use it in case of more powerful hardware so your miners bypass low starting difficulty provided by pool with first connection.
Or you may want to use it in case of less modern hardware so your miners get low difficulty job to work on from the start.(minimum start diff can be 20x smaller than default).
Use sd= to set starting difficulty setting for you miner. It will get adjusted during your mining to most appropriate value based on your hardware power.
You may want to use it in case of more powerful hardware so your miners bypass low starting difficulty provided by pool with first connection.
Or you may want to use it in case of less modern hardware so your miners get low difficulty job to work on from the start.(minimum start diff can be 20x smaller than default).
Use sd= to set starting difficulty setting for you miner. It will get adjusted during your mining to most appropriate value based on your hardware power.
Notice that the minimum sd has to be 20x less than default. My guess is that sd=6 is lower than this, but 8 is fine.
May 31, 2022, 10:05:34 AM
new version with very realistic data earnings
https://github.com/smilodon76/RXOS-amdOS-zergpool
https://github.com/smilodon76/RXOS-amdOS-zergpool
May 18, 2022, 04:57:02 AM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
I noticed this problem 6 months ago, but i thought this is normal. Pool did not response to the sd=* argument. So now i know it is not normal - i hope we get an information about that.
May 17, 2022, 01:29:34 PM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
May 04, 2022, 12:52:25 AM
Note to cpuminer-opt users the syntax for secure stratum connections is stratum+tcps.
It's the same as stratum+ssl with other miners.
Edit: cpuminer-opt-3.19.8 now accepts stratum+ssl.
It's the same as stratum+ssl with other miners.
Edit: cpuminer-opt-3.19.8 now accepts stratum+ssl.
February 01, 2022, 12:50:30 AM
UPDATE
1. $FLUX Parallel asset mining was approved and is now available at zergpool.com, receive an extra 50% of reward by mining $FLUX coin at equihash125!
cheers, pinpin
1. $FLUX Parallel asset mining was approved and is now available at zergpool.com, receive an extra 50% of reward by mining $FLUX coin at equihash125!
cheers, pinpin
January 23, 2022, 02:25:27 PM
xmr-stak 2.10.8 is the most popular software for mining cryptonight_gpu. I DLed but I cannot get it to run.
Would someone please share an xmr-stak command line that works with ZergPool. TIA
Any plans to offer Autolykos (ERG), ProgPow (SERO) or Equihash (210,9) (AION) ?
BTW, I think allowing solo mining undermines the utility of your pool. Whether someone mines pooled or solo they will earn the same in the long run. But allowing solo means that ether in ZP is useless. Please eliminate solo mining.
Would someone please share an xmr-stak command line that works with ZergPool. TIA
Any plans to offer Autolykos (ERG), ProgPow (SERO) or Equihash (210,9) (AION) ?
BTW, I think allowing solo mining undermines the utility of your pool. Whether someone mines pooled or solo they will earn the same in the long run. But allowing solo means that ether in ZP is useless. Please eliminate solo mining.
January 10, 2022, 11:27:33 AM
Add ability to check transaction-hash in explorer!
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
Thanks will consider these improvements for sure!
pinpin
January 03, 2022, 05:57:17 AM
Add ability to check transaction-hash in explorer!
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
December 26, 2021, 11:49:19 PM
Cheetahcoin will hard fork on hard fork on height 666136, the projected hard fork event will happen in second week of Jan 2022. Please upgrade all your pool wallet to the proper newest version. Thanks.
The binary for linux download, x64:
https://github.com/ShorelineCrypto/cheetahcoin/releases/tag/v1.9.1.0
The binary wallet files for linux on arm:
https://github.com/ShorelineCrypto/cheetahcoin/releases/tag/v1.9.1.2
The binary for linux download, x64:
https://github.com/ShorelineCrypto/cheetahcoin/releases/tag/v1.9.1.0
The binary wallet files for linux on arm:
https://github.com/ShorelineCrypto/cheetahcoin/releases/tag/v1.9.1.2
December 19, 2021, 04:24:12 PM
It has been several days with sufficient qty of GPBS for payout. Still no payout. Mined and all were blocks.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
Went back to payout in 3+ hours. Beginning to get tired of this.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
Went back to payout in 3+ hours. Beginning to get tired of this.
Got two pay-outs with most of the coins. Guess the rest may become a donation if they are not paid. Balance is now below minimum payout threshold.
[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
It has been several days with sufficient qty of GPBS for payout. Still no payout. Mined and all were blocks.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
It has been several days with sufficient qty of GPBS for payout. Still no payout. Mined and all were blocks.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
Went back to payout in 3+ hours. Beginning to get tired of this.
It has been several days with sufficient qty of GPBS for payout. Still no payout. Mined and all were blocks.
Well that was quick. Now says processing.
Went back to payout in 3+ hours. Beginning to get tired of this.
Got two pay-outs with most of the coins. Guess the rest may become a donation if they are not paid. Balance is now below minimum payout threshold.
[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
December 10, 2021, 05:24:08 AM
Hello,
Update
1. Ever wanted to get paid in low fee non-minable assets when mining at http://zergpool.com? Now it is possible, with new assets as part of guaranteed payouts, welcome Tron
@Tronfoundation $TRX and $USDT TRC20 token
Update
1. Ever wanted to get paid in low fee non-minable assets when mining at http://zergpool.com? Now it is possible, with new assets as part of guaranteed payouts, welcome Tron
@Tronfoundation $TRX and $USDT TRC20 token
December 05, 2021, 02:39:41 AM
UPDATE
1. $GALE and $REA coins are added on sha256csm algorithm
1. $GALE and $REA coins are added on sha256csm algorithm
November 22, 2021, 11:02:36 PM
Is pool down?
November 19, 2021, 06:10:22 AM
Hi. No payment/ Check please. https://zergpool.com/?address=LYFwCaZk1YF8m787dRjHkPcoqjtoLxpx5F
November 17, 2021, 07:58:53 PM
Hello Pinpin. Today I saw something on your Zergpool that shocked me. I rented some hash to try and get some bitcoin stuck on your pool release by trying to hit the limit.
I first put it on SOLO for about an hour and gave up. I was mining scrypt. So the next 2 hours I put it on Shared mode.
Then I noticed something and this makes me want to move another pool.
At around 7:30 PM EST I noticed I had 20% of digibyte shares with a reward of 97.00 of them.
Then over the course of now 20 min It started going backwards. Hash rate was still 14 Gh/s yet the reward now is at 78.00 and the % is at 16.
I'm sorry but if hash rate is constant it should not be going backwards. As I'm writing this out it's dropped again now at 73 and 15%
As I end this post it dropped to 12% and reward of 65 digibyte. Ouch.
I'm moving my hash somewhere else for now.
I first put it on SOLO for about an hour and gave up. I was mining scrypt. So the next 2 hours I put it on Shared mode.
Then I noticed something and this makes me want to move another pool.
At around 7:30 PM EST I noticed I had 20% of digibyte shares with a reward of 97.00 of them.
Then over the course of now 20 min It started going backwards. Hash rate was still 14 Gh/s yet the reward now is at 78.00 and the % is at 16.
I'm sorry but if hash rate is constant it should not be going backwards. As I'm writing this out it's dropped again now at 73 and 15%
As I end this post it dropped to 12% and reward of 65 digibyte. Ouch.
I'm moving my hash somewhere else for now.
November 11, 2021, 12:30:29 AM
Neoscrypt port 4233 seems incompatible with Nicehash.
Hi, can you provide screenshot?
Update
1. Happy to announce a new referral bonus earnings program, we are starting today for a period of 1 month. Earn 0.2% from your referrals mining and get a discount on the pool fee in the amount of 0.2% using referral links. More details following: https://zergpool.com/site/referrals
[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
October 13, 2021, 12:48:26 PM
Neoscrypt port 4233 seems incompatible with Nicehash.
August 27, 2021, 05:26:26 AM
Coin Fanaticos Cash(FCH)
address Fi4icDqCWBtu5hMZRxm8RvbMjt1ZQhJdBi
Warning: your wallet address is identified as invalid FreeCash(FCH) address
Why is the system trying to send coins to the FreeCash(FCH) blockchain coins if I earned Fanaticos Cash(FCH)? Correct this discrepancy
address Fi4icDqCWBtu5hMZRxm8RvbMjt1ZQhJdBi
Warning: your wallet address is identified as invalid FreeCash(FCH) address
Why is the system trying to send coins to the FreeCash(FCH) blockchain coins if I earned Fanaticos Cash(FCH)? Correct this discrepancy
Jump to: