Pages:
Author

Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 17. (Read 5352295 times)

legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Could I find out if the Block find reward/incentive  is still valid? Eg >9.5PH = 1BTC for found block.
Heh that's a couple of years ago.
Been long gone.
There was even another reward up until the last halving a couple of years ago that also, of course, expired.

You could always solo mine here and get the whole 6.25BTC+txn fees (minus a tiny 0.5% pool fee)
jr. member
Activity: 36
Merit: 2
Could I find out if the Block find reward/incentive  is still valid? Eg >9.5PH = 1BTC for found block.
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Kano, How can I retrieve my login password?
On the login/register page (link at top right) use the "Password reset" at the bottom.

Enter your username and email address you registered with, and if you get them right it will send you an email to change your password.
If you have 2FA enabled, you must also get that correct.
Your username will be in your miner.

I don't (and the system doesn't) know your password, only a multiply hashed version of it with some random data.
newbie
Activity: 6
Merit: 0
Kano, How can I retrieve my login password?
legendary
Activity: 3822
Merit: 2703
Evil beware: We have waffles!

That said, Here Blocky! Here Blocky!
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
Is it me or are we overdue for a block???
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Master Server Upgrade

There will be a mining outage, 24 hours from now, for all miners, at UTC 04:59 07-Dec
for at least 10 minutes and for a maximum of 30 minutes.

The server will be upgraded.
The new server is a Dual: 2nd Gen Xeon Gold 6230R 26 Core (total 104 threads) 128GB
as many know, the current one is a Dual: Xeon Gold 5118 12 Core (total 48 threads) 96GB
Also, system/db/bitcoin disk going from 480G raid1 ssd to 1T roc raid1 nvme

While the upgrade isn't at all necessary for performance - KDB uses about 16GB RAM but about 1/3 the CPU of the pool code
The same provider has the new server for less than the old one - so definitely worth doing Smiley
This also simplifies upgrading software also: Linux, Bitcoin and the pool code that doesn't work with bitcoin 0.20

Come visit Discord if you have any questions.

Mine on! Smiley

-----------------

Edit: as mentioned in Discord - all went ok - all up and running.
Took a bit over 20 minutes.
newbie
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
how many has comissions pool?
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
All right Kano let me do what you love doing: I'll open a new thread with the message you just deleted. Perhaps i should title it something along these lines: Kanopool baseless firmware discrimination. How about it? Give me your opinion.

Of course you have the right to ban anyone you like from your pool. I also have the right to express my opinion of this senseless behavior.

I'm not even bothering to try this pool anymore, the problem is with the pool operator, not even the software.
Well when you make a post that includes incorrect statements and is generally being critical of things you don't fully understand, yep I'll delete it.

While there are those on the forum who 'think' they are bitcoin experts and thus make claims about how the experts are wrong, because someone on youtube told them something that must be right coz youtube said so - trying to tell me that I don't know what I'm doing will not get you anywhere in this thread.

Feel free to ask questions about things you don't know or don't understand, but critical arm chair experts are likely to have their posts deleted.

I do find this rather hypocritical of some people who post in this area of the forum and claim how they don't like my attitude and that I should bow down to them and say 'Yes sir what do you want?' after they attack what I'm doing or make ignorant arguments against what I do know.
Nope I don't do that. Money does not drive me to beg and grovel for it, unlike a lot of people.
There's no point telling an expert that you know better than they do and the expert should grovel for your approval.

Edit: and since your sig is just one very big advert for that pool and their firmware you like that charges miners to use it by pool swapping - I've removed the post. Your full post is quoted above in this one Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2483
Merit: 1482
-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-
After testing the ckpool passthrough in proxy mode, and 10 found blocks where
corectly tranfered to the main pool, I consider that as save.

Now I will test the ckpassthrough in node mode and I let you know the result.


legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Hello Mr Kano,

Are you still working on it? Thanks.

...
I'm sure anyone who has been waiting for 6 months or more for their dust will be glad they didn't get it and spend it back then Smiley
Yeah still doing code changes - PPS for a few of the top miners.
After that I'll work on sending dust.
xuy
member
Activity: 92
Merit: 10
Hello Mr Kano,

Are you still working on it? Thanks.

Kano will hold your BTC if you don't provide an address, like he did for others in the past. He said he would send out 'dust' and held BTC by the end of this year.
Once dust is not dust any more Smiley


One thing I don't get about people who want to go to Antpoo, if you get a daily payout, won't you also pay $10 or more in transaction fees to get your payout? I actually would prefer the opposite. I would want a pool to allow you to keep your balance as long as you want until you think it is worth $10 to get your payout. Or am I not understanding how BTC transaction fees work?

I am not sure if Antpool allows for this by simply not  supplying a wallet address.

Btw, what happens here at Kano if you do not have a wallet address added? I somehow doubt your balance will be held for you. Not sure though.
Yeah still working on it - that's basically what I'm spending almost all my coding time on at the moment - will be early next year.

Got sidetracked with the October bad luck, where I ended up adding full share hashing and verification to KanoDB for all shares submitted, and also added block submission to KanoDB for all blocks found.
All that new code is 100% original by me to ensure it's a complete independent verification of the pool results - and of course will pick up any bugs/memory corruption if that ever happens in the pool code.

I'm sure anyone who has been waiting for 6 months or more for their dust will be glad they didn't get it and spend it back then Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2483
Merit: 1482
-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-
Don't bother posting any more pings, you're purposefully biasing the results.
I don't biasing any result. And I don't know why I should.
This was the result from home vs. beeing logged into the server on the decix and do the same test.
You can clearly see that the connection to your Amsterdam Node is ultra fast.
Amsterdam is directly peered with Frankfurt, you can see that using mtr.
It was not posted to make the passthrough look better, it was posted to show my situation from home.
My home provider do not use the shortest way possible, for price I guess, peering cost money.
I noticed that during the test.

Quote
And a second block was found: 1891851 Version 0x20800000
https://tbtc.bitaps.com/1891851
Actually that's not the second, there have been more.
I don't get what you want to say, that was the second block found by my miner during the test.

But anyway, it's not using the -N pasthru which is the whole point of using passthu so that your shares are validated and submitted as a block.
That's the point, I will test that and report the result I found.
If the  software fails, I won't use it as I don't want to put people on risk.

i.e. if you set it up as you should, and not ignore the major advantage of using a block submitting node, you'd be better off by amost 100ms ... if your ping values were correct.
I ignore nothing, I simply did a passthrough in proxy mode with all disadvantage it brings with it.
And yes, setting it up as Node is much better and you point me to that, thank you.


legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
...
from home 35.4 ms - 95.7 ms
over decix 27 ms + 7,69 ms = 34,69ms
not to bad from home, but more reliable and constant over the decix.
I don't think you understand ping.
It's not a one off what random worst value did you get ... vs what is the best value you got from doing something else to make that seem better when it won't be.

Every packet you send goes out your network and has the issue of your home provider, no matter where it goes.
So if you have a crap provider at home, you can't avoid that without moving your miners somewhere else or using a closer block submitting node.
Networks also tend to give ping packets low priority, so they wont be absolute.
Anyway, this ping you are doing is a waste of time, you aren't even showing your results properly, and are biasing them to try and make your decix server, routing via somewhere else, sound like a good idea, which is isn't. It also has to be processed buy that server, i.e a stop in the middle of the network process, before it then sends the packets out though some of the network it has already traveled.

Don't bother posting any more pings, you're purposefully biasing the results.

Quote
And a second block was found: 1891851 Version 0x20800000
https://tbtc.bitaps.com/1891851

When 10 blocks are reached I try the -N passthrough, but with my 3 TH it will take a while.
Actually that's not the second, there have been more.
But anyway, it's not using the -N pasthru which is the whole point of using passthu so that your shares are validated and submitted as a block, which in your case you claim to be 27ms vs your current unreliable solo pool operator that's lost 5 or 6 blocks due to negligence, which you stated is 113ms - 127ms
(but I doubt those numbers are accurate either)
i.e. if you set it up as you should, and not ignore the major advantage of using a block submitting node, you'd be better off by amost 100ms ... if your ping values were correct.
legendary
Activity: 2483
Merit: 1482
-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-
You ping the node closest to you - there's a bunch of them listed on the home page: https://kano.is
From your post I'd guess it would be nl.kano.is
It's two servers with two different providers, so you may get slightly different results each time you try.
And yes it submits blocks directly to the bitcoin network from there when your share gets to the node.

done that:
Code:
nl.kano.is from home
at worst
64 bytes from 45.76.32.61.vultr.com (45.76.32.61): icmp_seq=17 ttl=56 time=95.7 ms
at best
64 bytes from 45.76.32.61.vultr.com (45.76.32.61): icmp_seq=25 ttl=56 time=35.4 ms

nl.kano.is from decix
64 bytes from 45.76.32.61.vultr.com (45.76.32.61): icmp_req=15 ttl=56 time=7.96 ms (only 7 hops! in total)

from home 35.4 ms - 95.7 ms
over decix 27 ms + 7,69 ms = 34,69ms
not to bad from home, but more reliable and constant over the decix.

And a second block was found: 1891851 Version 0x20800000
https://tbtc.bitaps.com/1891851

When 10 blocks are reached I try the -N passthrough, but with my 3 TH it will take a while.
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
...
Edit:
I was a bit shocked that my home internet is that bad, so I tested kano.is as well:
Code:
home to kano.is
64 bytes from 45.77.7.149.vultr.com (45.77.7.149): icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=188 ms
home to decix
64 bytes from v38928.1blu.de (178.254.35.104): icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=27.0 ms
decix to kano.is
64 bytes from 45.77.7.149.vultr.com (45.77.7.149): icmp_req=1 ttl=57 time=148 ms
total via decix:27 ms + 148ms = 175ms
direct 188 ms
the result is the same, over the decix it is faster.
(using mtr displays the cause, my home provider routes using more hops)
There's no point pinging the web server in silicon valley.
It doesn't accept mining.

You ping the node closest to you - there's a bunch of them listed on the home page: https://kano.is
From your post I'd guess it would be nl.kano.is
It's two servers with two different providers, so you may get slightly different results each time you try.
And yes it submits blocks directly to the bitcoin network from there when your share gets to the node.
legendary
Activity: 2483
Merit: 1482
-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-
Hmm - then that defeats the purpose of using a passthru though.
Your passthru is also adding latency to any blocks found - which can be noticeable if the passthru is far from the pool.
Yes, it may add an extra delay, but that passthrough is intend to enable people to
connect to the pool that otherwise would not be able to connect due to the restriction
of the american provider.

For example if I use my home internet connection it is faster to connect over the passthrough.
Ping time from home to pool 127 ms
Ping time from home via passthrough 86,4 ms + 27 ms = 113,4 ms
Code:
from passthrough (DECIX) to solo4.ckpool.org
64 bytes from solo4.ckpool.org (51.81.56.15): icmp_req=6 ttl=53 time=86.4 ms
from my Home to solo4.ckpool.org
64 bytes from solo4.ckpool.org (51.81.56.15): icmp_seq=6 ttl=53 time=127 ms
from Home to passthrough
64 bytes from v38928.1blu.de (178.254.35.104): icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=27.0 ms
so It depends on your specific internet connection.

When you use -N it submits the block to the bitcoin network locally, at the passthru node, as soon as the share gets to the node.
(though the code has the mask wrong)
when I finished testing the -P passthrough, I will also test the -N and report the result, as this would be the better choice if that works ok.


Edit:
I was a bit shocked that my home internet is that bad, so I tested kano.is as well:
Code:
home to kano.is
64 bytes from 45.77.7.149.vultr.com (45.77.7.149): icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=188 ms
home to decix
64 bytes from v38928.1blu.de (178.254.35.104): icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=27.0 ms
decix to kano.is
64 bytes from 45.77.7.149.vultr.com (45.77.7.149): icmp_req=1 ttl=57 time=148 ms
total via decix:27 ms + 148ms = 175ms
direct 188 ms
the result is the same, over the decix it is faster.
(using mtr displays the cause, my home provider routes using more hops)
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
The passthru also is supposed to submit blocks itself, is that how you have it setup?

No, I used the -P switch, there is a bitcoind present but I did not try -N
Hmm - then that defeats the purpose of using a passthru though.
Your passthru is also adding latency to any blocks found - which can be noticeable if the passthru is far from the pool.

When you use -N it submits the block to the bitcoin network locally, at the passthru node, as soon as the share gets to the node.
(though the code has the mask wrong)

In your case (not -N) you have to include the extra wait for the share to get passed by your passthru back to wherever in the world the pool is.
legendary
Activity: 2483
Merit: 1482
-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-
The passthru also is supposed to submit blocks itself, is that how you have it setup?

No, I used the -P switch, there is a bitcoind present but I did not try -N

Well as he stated in the ckpool thread - he doesn't test it ... so how does he know it works?

that was in 2018, I am not the person who can answer you that question.
But you are right by pushing me to test it, if I offer that service, and I take that very seriously.

That's not an AB block - it's block version is 0x20000000

Well, yes, my fault, I was just reporting after it found the block without checking the version.

legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
EDIT:
My test run a couple of hours now, and it found the first block using the latest source of ckpool from bitbucket.
The miner (S9 with AB) is connected over a second instance of ckpool in passthrough mode.
Proof:  https://tbtc.bitaps.com/1891742

I will let that run for a few days, and if that runs flowlessly I would consider that safe to go back online.
I keep you informed.
That's not an AB block - it's block version is 0x20000000

The passthru also is supposed to submit blocks itself, is that how you have it setup?

I use the latest version from cks repository and we talked about using it on irc, I had no trouble with it
so far, and I did not get a negative response from eigther ck or the user.
...
Well as he stated in the ckpool thread - he doesn't test it ... so how does he know it works?
Pages:
Jump to: