Author

Topic: [DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 314. (Read 1601412 times)

legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
Not sure I understand what you mean by compromising the network.

Well say that people join a pool that's being run on a server that belongs to someone who want's to attack the network and compromise the chain with fake transactions. I read countless of times on these forums and in the wiki that something like is impossible because someone would need a cpu power to match at least 50% of the rest of the network. Well isn't that what a pool is? Basically a server with the power of loads and loads of CPUs combined?
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 505
Could pools get so big that the difficulty gets so high ...
difficulty gets higher with more network-hashing-power, doesn't matter if that power is pooled or not.
Quote
...wont be worth mining...
not a matter of difficulty, or hashpower at all.

Quote
Could pools get so big that one pool could have enough hashing speed to actually compromise the network?
in theory, yes.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Could pools get so big that the difficulty gets so high that not being in a pool even if you have 4 GPUs of your own you'll be better off in a poll then not?

From what I understand, it's actually approaching that fairly quickly.

Could pools get so big that one pool could have enough hashing speed to actually compromise the network?

Not sure I understand what you mean by compromising the network.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
Could pools get so big that the difficulty gets so high that not being in a pool even if you have 4 GPUs of your own wont be worth mining anymore unless you also join a pool?

Could pools get so big that one pool could have enough hashing speed to actually compromise the network?
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1000
Yep - I understand my statement lacks logic...

Something about seeing rewards getting smaller is disappointing (even if they are more frequent)
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
I would be pleased if [Tycho]'s pool stayed right around 30-35Ghash  ;)
Why ? :)
I imagine because with more the proportional share gets smaller and smaller for those with high speed hashing.
Yes, is gets smaller, but more often. Overall reward per hour/day will be the same.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
I would be pleased if [Tycho]'s pool stayed right around 30-35Ghash  Wink
Why ? Smiley

I imagine because with more the proportional share gets smaller and smaller for those with high speed hashing.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
I would be pleased if [Tycho]'s pool stayed right around 30-35Ghash  ;)
Why ? :)
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
What's the number in the bottom right corner on your web-site for? It keeps changing every time i switch pages.
It's time spent for generating this page. Not connected to the pool at all.
Letters and numbers at the bottom left corner is bitcoin address - you can send donations there :)
member
Activity: 79
Merit: 10
What's the number in the bottom right corner on your web-site for? It keeps changing every time i switch pages.
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1000
I would be pleased if [Tycho]'s pool stayed right around 30-35Ghash  Wink
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097
This is little offtopic, but the right reason why I closed registration was that in the some point pool started to grow exponentially (difficulty was low, bitcoin price was high and somebody slashdotted it) and I was too slow in adding more and more bitcoinds Smiley. For current pool users, there is no reason for making pool even bigger; more ghash/s does not add any benefit for them.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
[Tycho] I don't know if you mentioned this before but are you going to limit to how many users can participate in the pool?
No, i'm not planning to set such restriction.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
But maybe no, because you know (from me) that there will be problems with bitcoind. That's the point. Btw, my pool software (not bitcoind) can handle thousands of getworks per second and I never had problems with speed of my custom software.

(Bts it's nice example of another issue, in the times when I made the pool, running more instances of bitcoind on the same machine was not possible because of hardcoded listening on the 8333 port.)
Ok, sorry again for this, my statement was unsuitable. You are doing great work and thanks for info about bitcoind.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
[Tycho] I don't know if you mentioned this before but are you going to limit to how many users can participate in the pool?
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097
Quote
[03:51] <[Tycho]> On how many getworks/sec did you started to get problems in the first time ?
[03:51] I think around 30ghash, not sure which getwork/s it was

Nobody is lying here. Yes, in my case on 30ghash/s the bitcoind started to fail. But it is not related to hashrate, but to getworks/sec. As you're using the same core as me, you'll hit the same problems later.

But maybe no, because you know (from me) that there will be problems with bitcoind. That's the point. Btw, my pool software (not bitcoind) can handle thousands of getworks per second and I never had problems with speed of my custom software.

(Bts it's nice example of another issue, in the times when I made the pool, running more instances of bitcoind on the same machine was not possible because of hardcoded listening on the 8333 port.)
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
My pool software is much more efficient, so i don't see any problems with number of clients.
Hehe, don't say this - you are still on 30ghashes, I had no problems on this speed, too (and also don't have problem at current 90ghash/s).
I never had troubles with speed of pool software itself and I see your statement as little unfair, because you didin't have to solve 90% of troubles which I had. Just my 2 cents...
I was talking about all the pool complex in total. Sorry, no offense intended.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097
My pool software is much more efficient, so i don't see any problems with number of clients.

Hehe, don't say this - you are still on 30ghashes, I had no problems on this speed, too (and also don't have problem at current 90ghash/s).

And please don't forget that lot of issues was caused by non optimized miners; I spent weeks with miner developers to find those glitches and bugs. The last huge improvement was support for long living HTTP connections, this was the reason why I closed the pool registrations, because hundreds of miners connecting every few seconds literally DDoSed the server with SYN floods.

I never had troubles with speed of pool software itself and I see your statement as little unfair, because you didin't have to solve 90% of troubles which I had. Just my 2 cents...
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1000
I have been much happier on proportional of late as we are knocking out the blocks in quick fashion...
newbie
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
Quote
03.03.2011 15:31:03   0h 30m    13757   
03.03.2011 15:00:07   0h 32m    14833   
03.03.2011 14:27:56   0h 53m    24684   
03.03.2011 13:34:48   0h 19m    8745   

That's a lot of luck.

@sahtor

At 1.5 MHash/s (about twice your speed) I've generated 69 shares in 48 hours.
Jump to: