Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 954. (Read 5352429 times)

yep) 7 more this day, please

Finally!!

We got one, finally!

Block by johnscl with 38TH/s!  This is our 1st of BLOCK WEDNESDAY and a whole bunch of payouts!

Also contemplating whether T9s would be worth the extra energy costs in long run due to better product longevity.
I'd consider myself very lucky if half of my S9 ASICs last for 2 years, sustaining original hash rate.

If an average T9 does last the expected 2 years without any faults, it could be a better option for ultra-low electricity cost mining farms.

Disliking of ROI, enjoyment of paying a higher energy cost, and enjoyment of purchasing extra cooling equipment and PSUs. 

Why get a T9 over an S9?

No problems with T9s so far. most are running below 80deg (average 77) except of 1 averaging 81deg with avrg hashrate od 12.4Th. All others averaging at 12.7Th.

room temperature is 17deg

Hardware forum would be best.

What subforum do you think I could post in to check why my S7 has one board going over 70C at 612Mhz while the other two are at 63C. Do you think it might need internal cleaning?

The passthru at stratum.kano.is gave the boot to everyone not connected to a node, starting at 18:44 UTC
I reset it at 18:49 and it's all OK again.
Hash rate is back up.

Just an FYI about the 'almost complete' code I've been working on rewriting most of my DB code and mentioned a few times:
These changes are also necessary to allow me to remove the disconnect problem ckpool has, with a not too distant future update after these changes are complete.

Although there's also a newer "remote node" option in ckpool that's an enhanced version of the current "node" I use, it's poor design will lose shares, if ever there's a remote node disconnect followed by a remote node restart any time before it reconnects.
So I've opted not to implement any "remote nodes".
Among other things I'm also a database person, who understands the importance of transaction integrity and transaction replay to be able to avoid losing data.
I don't store tens of thousands of text files in a directory as a 'pretend' database, I use a proper relational database to ensure data stored, is stored properly and reliably, and also my DB code can replay the logs files created to resync up the current database content with the current ckpool, whenever my DB code restarts.

Anyway, the "node" idea will eventually become a thing of the 'stone age' past not too far down the track when I replace "nodes" with small pools and my DB code will handle all the distribution of data properly.

meanwhile, yeah another slow block, oh well, as I said the other day, with random statistics you gotta take the good with the bad, it all evens out in the long run, as we certainly have more than evened out often enough

wow holly drop in hashrate batman....... Its saying that pool rate is down at  41,965.36THs right now.

I just lost connection to my miners for about 5 minutes. It looks like something happened on the pool also. Big hash drop. ?

This stubborn block is beginning to annoy me.  
I thought our 413.102% diff block from 2 days ago would cover the nasty blocks for at least a week or so.  
Oh well, luck and variance are a MoFo!

COMEONBLOCKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!  

Which countrrry you host minerrrs in moe7865 if you don't mind that I am asking and when you think therrre will be morrrre capacity there?

Read the text at the top

Does the "BTC to expect per Day per TH/s" assume a given amount of tx fees?
Confused since the calculated result for 100TH = "0.04181591 BTC + t3"
Seems to be 0.0003797621 difference for 100TH or ~0.256 for the whole 67493TH.

too much stales(( what the matter? who knows?

This estimator is about as close to real life as you can get...I've always been impressed with it

Thanks Kano!

For what it's worth...I bought 1 T9 new, it ran about 2 weeks, found a block, then the next day one of the hash boards died.  Sent it back for warranty.