Topic: [DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 298. (Read 1601419 times)

Working worker, why green from blue?

Awesome!   Now all we need some sort of notification, which I see is coming soon! 

UPDATE:
Now you can set your failure detection threshold (1-3600 minutes) separately for each worker. If no share is received from this account in given time the worker's name will turn red. Later i'll add e-mail notification too.

Technically there is no "fee", i'm just buying your shares by the price, offered by me. This price is 10% lower than average expectation.

Quote from: zoro on Today at 07:08:29 pm
Moreover i don't see the 10% fee in pps method that you have said. i calculate exaclty the shares x share_value and the outcome was exactly the BTCs that i got!

Quote from: Tycho
That's because price per share is already set with 10% subtracted from average expectation.


i will transfer the conversiation here because it has to do with your pool Tycho.
thanks for the reply but i was reffering to your pool, i dont see anywhere this 10% fee, only the 3% for proportional and nothing for pps!

How about the ability to set custom timeout notifications on workers, and the option to send an email if a worker goes down?   Nothing worse then having your GPU miner reboot itself or crash, and no shares.   

On my gpu miners, I'd like to set a 1 or 2 minute "red" with an alert.   Some of my slowest cpu miners go red at 30 minutes anyway, so I would like to bump them to 45 mins.

Right now, I'm constantly watching my stats page, looking for miners that fall out.

Thanks!

In the statistics (my account statistics) i think it would be nice to see the average amount of shares/h and the share/h of the last hour or something like that

Well, the "Your reward" shows pretty much the same, you just need to double your reward and this will be almost your percentage.
For example, if if shows that your reward is 3.5 BTC, your share is 7% (7.2164948453608247422680412371134% to be precise)
Since there is not much free space for that table, i had to choose something among the possible columns. Will think about this further.

My "To Do" list is about two screens long. But i like making modifications to data display because it's easy :)

Absolutely, it'd be a tough balance between keeping the time window long enough to give the desired accuracy while keeping it short enough to be useful.  I'm sure someone with a statistics background could figure out the needed time to get a small enough margin of error.

As far as turning the worker red, you could probably base that time interval off of historical data, e.g. if I've been working at X Mh/s over the past 24 hours then you should be able to figure out that 99% of the time you should see a new share in under N minutes.

Only other thing I can thing of would be to change the "Total Shares" statistics page to show "Your Shares/Total Shares" to see how much you contributed to each found block.

Really though these are all superficial changes to how the data is displayed so they're all just polish and not really important.  Functionally there's not really anything that I find lacking.

My current motherboard supports AGP only, so if I want to run with GPU I have no choice but to gut my system to replace my old graphics card, motherboard, processor and ram (ie, major pain in the ass). I had already started looking into it, I'm rather sick of all my games crashing every 5 minutes due to a motherboard bug. I doubt I'll see much of a difference in my power bill, I used to run Folding@Home 24/7 anyway.

Yes, that would be useful. But you must remember that luck meter can't be really accurate on time intervals shorter than some hours.
I'm thinking about removing the right gray column (which was intended to contain nice drawing) to make more room for tables.
30 min. interval for turning red will be definitely user-configurable (i'm currently adding a new "settings" page), and i may add option to mark it with some other ill color when it's speed falls below defined threshold.

Thanks :) I'm trying to do my best.
Actually 3% fee is almost lower than some other pools ask.

As has been stated numerous times, CPU mining really is not profitable at this point in Bitcoin. You will most likely spend more on electricity than you will make mining.

A suggestion for anyone with an office computer with an available pci-e slot:

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=sapphire+5670&hl=en&biw=1016&bih=935&prmd=ivns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=1275012490375071464&sa=X&ei=vfuTTYiuHo6ksQOPmtjDBQ&ved=0CGcQ8wIwBQ#

The 5670 will get you about 75MH/s or so and does not need external power, meaning you can probably use the generic power supply that comes with just about any computer. Depending on shipping, it costs about $80 USD which is a much more sound investment, in my opinion, than finding a better CPU for an older motherboard.

At Pay per share of 0.0006/share, given that 1MH/s equates to about 1 share an hour, that's about 75 shares an hour (1800 shares/day), which is 1.08 BTC/day. You can recoup your costs in a little over two months if nothing changes.

If I'm not mistaken, the difficulty has gone down a bit recently, from 75k to 60-something (sorry I'm only back mining these last few days.) I think when I started it was 55k, and people were saying how insane the jump had been in the preceding two weeks. I think once the whole Slashdot effect wares off (if it hasn't already) the difficulty should at least be more stable than the jump that occurred during that influx.

Anyway, the suggestion is just my opinion. I know there are numerous projects for CPU mining, I just don't think anyone with less than a multi-socket setup will see any tangible return, and if anything, they will see a large power bill, which will only increase once summer gets here, when running the A/C doubles the price paid per kW/h of any heat-generating appliance.

One thing that I'd find useful is extending the worker's table under "My Account" to display hash/s for the past 30m/24h/all time.  Since I've got this all running on a separate box I find it's much easier to visit your site to check on my miners than to get to the miners directly, and if I'm not at home it's the only way that I can check on them.  Turning the worker red when it hasn't received a share in 30m is useful, but only detects complete failures, it doesn't detect misconfiguration (e.g. I forgot to overclock a card or accidentally ran two miners on a single GPU).  To keep things clean you could probably remove the password and reward columns since they only change when the user changes them.

Great job with the site/pool so far though, definitely worth the 3% it for all of the benefits it brings.

As far as CPU mining goes, you're not going to get much out of it.  You should consider a GPU.  Well, if you insist on CPU mining and this is your own personal machine, you have one possible option.  If you've got Socket 939, you might be able to find a Socket 939 Althlon X2 somewhere.  If it'll cost you more than $120 though, don't bother.

Thanks for the reply! I've tried ufasoft's and it is indeed faster.. I'm running an AMD64 3200+ with Windows XP SP3 32-bit (1 CPU) and 2GBs RAM. With only the miner running I seem to peak at 933 kh/s whereas with puddinpop's I peak at 888 kh/s. Is this really the best I can get or can I get better?
The command line I used is:
Thanks.

I have other ways to check this; I'm prepared since i expected someone to implement Raulo's attack :)
And if they will do it with sufficient speed, i'll notice it.

It is the only way you will truly know if everyone is mining honestly.

EDIT: there is an element of curiosity to know distribution of luck also ...

Actually at this moment i'm not keeping information about who solved the block because it doesn't matters for anything except curiosity.
And i have more than a 1000 of users, this would be a really long list. You want this to check if it's better to mine in pool or solo ?

I'm planning to add info about average number of shares per block in the last 24 hours, which should be almost the same and useful for checking statistics.
What's the point of breaking it into separate users if you don't know who is who anyway ?

Any thoughts on this [TYCHO], yes, no maybe?

More transparency and information is always good for building confidence, right?

I think you've got a configuration problem, because nobody else is reporting such bizarre behavior   Maybe you could head over to the cpuminer thread and provide technical details sufficient for a bug report?