Hybrid Payment scheme | Bitcointalksearch.org

Meni Rosenfeld

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1054

Quote from: coblee on July 28, 2011, 07:34:49 PM

What about a hybrid between PPLNS and SMPPS? Both are hopping-proof. This should reduce the variance of pure PPLNS with fixed SMPPS payouts. And help the pool get out of a negative buffer hole when it will inevitably get into sooner or later.

SMPPS is not truly hopping-proof. You can hop by mining for it only when its balance is positive, enjoying 0-fee 0-variance payouts when it is, and leaving others to worry about the inevitable collapse when it's negative.

It might be true that combining PPLNS with PPS can lead to a more optimal balance of variance between the operator and participants.

coblee

donator

Activity: 1654

Merit: 1354

Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.

What about a hybrid between PPLNS and SMPPS? Both are hopping-proof. This should reduce the variance of pure PPLNS with fixed SMPPS payouts. And help the pool get out of a negative buffer hole when it will inevitably get into sooner or later.

Meni Rosenfeld

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1054

Quote from: Xephan on July 26, 2011, 02:04:23 PM

Apart from the possible processing load, is there any technical reason why no pool uses a hybrid payment system?

e.g. 80% PPLNS + 20% PPS so that those who contributed during a round would get some value, especially for those who don't mine 24/7. However, this portion is not enough to be worth pool hopping due to the PPLNS portion which would encourage miners to stick out a long round.

Did you mean Proportional instead of PPS?

You're misunderstanding how hopping-proof methods work. They don't encourage anyone to stick out a long round. They just give the same average payout for future shares without regard to the past. So in a long round, the PPLNS part will give normal payment while the proportional part will give less than normal, so the total will be less than normal and a hopper will hop.

Hybrid schemes are possible but they tend to have the disadvantages of both components, plus the complexity disadvantage, without much of their respective advantages.

And, it is a myth that PPLNS has some horrible disadvantage for intermittent miners. They have the same expectation with only a slight increase in variance.

Xephan

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Apart from the possible processing load, is there any technical reason why no pool uses a hybrid payment system?

e.g. 80% PPLNS + 20% PPS so that those who contributed during a round would get some value, especially for those who don't mine 24/7. However, this portion is not enough to be worth pool hopping due to the PPLNS portion which would encourage miners to stick out a long round.

Topic: Hybrid Payment scheme (Read 1082 times)