Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers - page 129. (Read 903163 times)

Drop to 900MHz.  Everyone is on 2.4GHZ now.  (Well, not for gaming though or high bandwidth stuff.)

I got a 2.4/5 combo 802.11ac router.  It's better, but not perfect.

Time to upgrade your gear to 5GHz... better yet, one with MIMO and Beamforming antennae.

I can absolutely confirm the effects of bad wifi interference.  In my new neighborhood there is so much junk over 2.4 GHz (10+ 802.11 routers visible from my living from with 4-5 out of 5 on signal strength) that it's completely unusable for gaming due to the constant latency bouncing, which sucks because the location of the modem makes it very difficulty to hardwire anything in.

While mining isn't quite as bad as gaming in terms of the effects of latency, it is the root cause of stale shares, especially if you're seeings spikes above 500ms just to talk to your router.  The other cause of stales is mining hardware which can't be interrupted when new work is available, which adds an extra bit of latency to switching to new work.

Yup, looks like your Wifi is getting periodic interference there... you'll definitely benefit from ethernet.

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>ping 192.168.1.11

Pinging 192.168.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=349ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=541ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=542ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.11:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 542ms, Average = 358ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>

Edit: Second time///

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>ping 192.168.1.11

Pinging 192.168.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.11:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 6ms, Average = 3ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>

Third time...

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>ping 192.168.1.11

Pinging 192.168.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=538ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.11: bytes=32 time=-534ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.11:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = -534ms, Average = 2ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>

Bandwidth doesn't matter for mining but Latency does.  High lag can manifest in more rejects.

Ping your Avalon from your computer on the network over wifi.  If your pings come back lower than 5ms (some of my miners on an optimized wifi bridge link get 1ms or less), you should be ok. If it's higher, a wired connection will benefit your setup.

It's not about the bandwidth, my thought on this is the direct connection vs the time it takes to send and receive on wireless, especially without knowing the kind of NIC in the Avalon and the anywhere from 30-40 signale strength to the machine.

Mining does not use a lot of bandwidth so wired or wireless shouldn't make a difference. (i think)

It is worth a shot, yes, but a little late in the day (10pm) to run wire, family gettin ready for bed so I'll do it tomorrow but I am curious as to other peoples thoughts on the matter.

I'd at least try it, BloodWine. At the very least, you could rule it out as a factor.

I know this is probably a stupid question but when I first hookd up the avalon it seemed like I was getting waaaay more shares wired. Then I wen to wireless because I couldnt stand the noise of the machine. Well, I do have a 150' Cat5 I can run to the laundry where he machines at so I'm curious on your thoughts, do you think I might get more shares if I wire it back ?

O.k. That's why I thought maybe it was because I have not taken a payment yet.

Not sure why you're having issues on that page...it hasn't been changed since it was put there over a year ago.  It's simply a list of your PPS earnings and payments to your wallet.

I haven't mined enough to take a payment yet But whenever I click the button on the website it stops responding and windows can't recover the page. Is this simply because I haven't received a payment yet? I was just curious what that page is going to look like but can't open it at all. Just to clarify I mean the "Payments" icon at the top banner not the ones in the balance field.

Thanks Brandon, thanks eleuthria, appreciate the details!

Thanks for the clarification. Not sure how I got to five months...

That happens quite a lot (good luck + server issues).  Actually, it's pretty much exactly as frequent as bad luck + server issues.  Luck and backend issues are COMPLETELY unrelated.  The luck is based on how many blocks we found vs shares that were submitted.  When the backends crash for a few minutes, we aren't finding blocks, but we also aren't adding any shares either.  Also, the luck wasn't that bad when the backends had trouble.  The bad luck was over 6 hours before that.




3 month average is what's shown on the chart (all-time history made the chart freeze most browsers).  Though this last week has been brutal enough to finally put our 1-month average under 100%.  Not that it's not expected, you can't *always* be above 100%.

It's a coincidence, MinerRob.

And note that even with the soul-crushing bad luck since the 3rd, our five month average is still more than 102%.

Greetings, recently started mining; anyone ever seen a day where there were backend issues and some good luck, or does bad luck line up 100% of the time when there are technical issues with the backend / non miner end of things?