is it possible to see http://localhost:8337/stats#
on another Computer in another place to see the stats from anywhere?
(eg. VPN)
Topic: bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy - page 95. (Read 355689 times)
can it be worth to force mine at slush when we see someting like this:
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
Yeah, except you don't know if when you jump in, that's the start of a long round. The graph is what has already happened.
eeehh, If you know some method to find out if it will be a long or short round share it please, it would be a great help to all of us
yeah mine_friendly seemed like a good idea.. until you do the math.. it is is like anti hopping and not only are you getting the super long blocks with low share value, but you are doing so on purpose, this defeats the entire purpose of hopping and it doesnt take many of these super long blocks to totally negate all of our benefits gained from hopping.
I think it would be better, to donate one percent at any pool that agrees to not screw with hoppers. That goes to teh pool owner, who is the one who would actually screw with us.
I think it would be better, to donate one percent at any pool that agrees to not screw with hoppers. That goes to teh pool owner, who is the one who would actually screw with us.
Yeah, except you don't know if when you jump in, that's the start of a long round. The graph is what has already happened.
Yes I know but if not otherwise a better pool, can it be better to jump in slush for the 10% before to jump in backup? can it be worth to force mine at slush when we see someting like this:
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
Yeah, except you don't know if when you jump in, that's the start of a long round. The graph is what has already happened.
can it be worth to force mine at slush when we see someting like this:
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
mine_slush already does that, hope it didn't broke with the new scheduler, so you're getting a share of that don't worry
Ahh, good to know I'm not the only one. I'll see if I can fix it up, not sure how c00w intended to trigger a switch, let me try a quick hack.
now it was very long from BtcPool24 ------------------------
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
------------------------
and then
BtcPool24 and polmine changed to
api_disable
I have it manually changed back to mine - if I have not done this, does this stay at api_disable or sometimes changing back?
can someone update pools.cfg in git
Code:
[btcworld]
name: BTC World
mine_address: btcworld.de:8332
api_address: http://www.btcpool24.com/json_stats.php
api_method: json
api_key: shares_this_round
yep with pleasure but you're getting share count from "btcpool24" and put it in "btcworld" pool
, 2 distinct pools 
Ahh, good to know I'm not the only one. I'll see if I can fix it up, not sure how c00w intended to trigger a switch, let me try a quick hack.
now it was very long from BtcPool24 ------------------------
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
------------------------
and then
BtcPool24 and polmine changed to
api_disable
I have it manually changed back to mine - if I have not done this, does this stay at api_disable or sometimes changing back?
can someone update pools.cfg in git
Code:
[btcworld]
name: BTC World
mine_address: btcworld.de:8332
api_address: http://www.btcpool24.com/json_stats.php
api_method: json
api_key: shares_this_round
I believe it always stays api_disabled right now. When it actually says api_disabled.
BTCworld.. didnt we give up on them for faking stats? I have them disabled.. pretty sure it was due to screwing with us.
BTCworld.. didnt we give up on them for faking stats? I have them disabled.. pretty sure it was due to screwing with us.
hehe lots of btc[any] pools here,
can it be worth to force mine at slush when we see someting like this:
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
[url]
there have been some very short rounds...
I hope everybody isn't completely sworn off Bitclockers - they've found 4 blocks today.
And look who one of their top workers has been:
gnaget are you hopping them or riding 247?
Hasn't been a bad time to be 247, tbh.
Also, I've been running with Cherry Picker on more and more rigs for the last day or so. BitClockers doesn't seem to block, delay, QOS, etc. using CP. Interesting data point.
And look who one of their top workers has been:
gnaget are you hopping them or riding 247?
Hasn't been a bad time to be 247, tbh.
Also, I've been running with Cherry Picker on more and more rigs for the last day or so. BitClockers doesn't seem to block, delay, QOS, etc. using CP. Interesting data point.
I've been hopping them with mine_friendly.
Well, I don't really believe in mine_
But I make my friendly contributions in my own way
I believe it always stays api_disabled right now. When it actually says api_disabled.
BTCworld.. didnt we give up on them for faking stats? I have them disabled.. pretty sure it was due to screwing with us.
BTCworld.. didnt we give up on them for faking stats? I have them disabled.. pretty sure it was due to screwing with us.
Ahh, good to know I'm not the only one. I'll see if I can fix it up, not sure how c00w intended to trigger a switch, let me try a quick hack.
now it was very long from BtcPool24 ------------------------
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
[17:02:02] Error in pool api for btcpool24
------------------------
and then
BtcPool24 and polmine changed to
api_disable
I have it manually changed back to mine - if I have not done this, does this stay at api_disable or sometimes changing back?
This seems to be an issue:
Although, not sure how this related to server_update and this:
Not sure what the 10 is about, after a few rounds of slicing, that should always be true, which doesn't sound ideal...
Code:
min_slice = self.sliceinfo[valid_servers[0]]
server = valid_servers[0]
for server in valid_servers:
if self.sliceinfo[server] < min_slice:
min_slice = self.sliceinfo[server]
server = valid_servers[0]
Although, not sure how this related to server_update and this:
Code:
if self.sliceinfo[self.bh.pool.get_current()] > 10:
return True
Not sure what the 10 is about, after a few rounds of slicing, that should always be true, which doesn't sound ideal...
Ahh, good to know I'm not the only one. I'll see if I can fix it up, not sure how c00w intended to trigger a switch, let me try a quick hack.
edit: and now bitclockers at 2,3%
IDK if the slicer is working correctly. Just tried it again with bitclockers at 42% and polmine at around 38% and it would not switch off of bitclockers.
now polmine is at around 1,8% and next BtcPool24 at around 9,6% and it does not switch...edit: and now bitclockers at 2,3%
IDK if the slicer is working correctly. Just tried it again with bitclockers at 42% and polmine at around 38% and it would not switch off of bitclockers.
now polmine is at around 1,8% and next BtcPool24 at around 9,6% and it does not switch...edit: and now bitclockers at 2,3%
c00w did a lot of updating late last night.. not sure the status of the slicer. A lot of people were having problems at 4am eastern.
It IS expected to jump to some of those lower percent ones, but not very often.. we are trying to divide our work load between pools that are below 43% but not necessarily hop on and hop off immediately. I believe the last time he said it was around 3 minutes between hops. Mine is slicing
Also Know one thing, if you are on the latest and greatest you are on alpha untested software.
the slicing thing is new on c00ws, there might be some issues getting it to where we and he wants it.
It IS expected to jump to some of those lower percent ones, but not very often.. we are trying to divide our work load between pools that are below 43% but not necessarily hop on and hop off immediately. I believe the last time he said it was around 3 minutes between hops. Mine is slicing
Also Know one thing, if you are on the latest and greatest you are on alpha untested software.
the slicing thing is new on c00ws, there might be some issues getting it to where we and he wants it.
Yea, thats why I reverted to an older build for now. The cool thing about bitclockers is that their crappyness causes the old builds to "slice" in a way. Mining on bitclockers and polmine right now. When bitclockers lags about once a minute it switches to polmine.
is btcserv not going till now or in my config an error?
-------------------------------------------------
DB Verson: 0.2
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bitHopper.py", line 224, in
bithopper_global = BitHopper()
File "bitHopper.py", line 44, in __init__
self.db = database.Database(self)
File "/home/ewi/bitHopper/database.py", line 29, in __init__
self.check_database()
File "/home/ewi/bitHopper/database.py", line 130, in check_database
self.curs.execute(sql)
sqlite3.OperationalError: unknown database btcserv
-------------------------------------------------
TIA
-------------------------------------------------
DB Verson: 0.2
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bitHopper.py", line 224, in
bithopper_global = BitHopper()
File "bitHopper.py", line 44, in __init__
self.db = database.Database(self)
File "/home/ewi/bitHopper/database.py", line 29, in __init__
self.check_database()
File "/home/ewi/bitHopper/database.py", line 130, in check_database
self.curs.execute(sql)
sqlite3.OperationalError: unknown database btcserv
-------------------------------------------------
TIA
c00w did a lot of updating late last night.. not sure the status of the slicer. A lot of people were having problems at 4am eastern.
It IS expected to jump to some of those lower percent ones, but not very often.. we are trying to divide our work load between pools that are below 43% but not necessarily hop on and hop off immediately. I believe the last time he said it was around 3 minutes between hops. Mine is slicing
Also Know one thing, if you are on the latest and greatest you are on alpha untested software.
the slicing thing is new on c00ws, there might be some issues getting it to where we and he wants it.
It IS expected to jump to some of those lower percent ones, but not very often.. we are trying to divide our work load between pools that are below 43% but not necessarily hop on and hop off immediately. I believe the last time he said it was around 3 minutes between hops. Mine is slicing
Also Know one thing, if you are on the latest and greatest you are on alpha untested software.
the slicing thing is new on c00ws, there might be some issues getting it to where we and he wants it.
Hi everyone, first of all I wanted to say thank you to c00w and company for making this awesome hopper. I've been using it for about a week now and it rocks.
Second, I've been trying to get the slice scheduler working and it doesn't seem to do anything. I'm running BH with --scheduler SliceScheduler and it seems to stick to just one pool even though there are several below 43.5% any thoughts?
Second, I've been trying to get the slice scheduler working and it doesn't seem to do anything. I'm running BH with --scheduler SliceScheduler and it seems to stick to just one pool even though there are several below 43.5% any thoughts?
Jump to: