Hi
Can we mine LTC at Zpool?
Thanks
Can we mine LTC at Zpool?
Thanks
not yet. I need to find someone to update the stratum code to support segwit first...
Topic: ▂▃▅▆▇⫷[ 🆉🅿🅾🅾🅻.🅲🅰 ]⫸⫷[!KAWPOW!]⫸⫷[ the miners multipool ]⫸ ▇▆▅▃▂ - page 199. (Read 279614 times)
July 27, 2017, 12:52:43 PM
not yet. I need to find someone to update the stratum code to support segwit first...
July 27, 2017, 12:50:00 PM
Hi
Can we mine LTC at Zpool?
Thanks
Can we mine LTC at Zpool?
Thanks
July 27, 2017, 12:37:15 PM
I don't really want to report an issue until I have the full evidence to support that it actually is the issue. Not to mention Tpruvot doesn't really support the exchange portion of Yiimp so he may not care.
I will once I can get it installed and verify the pricing is as I suspect it may be. The code has logic that makes sense as to why the discrepancy is there, but I don't want to jump the gun.
I will once I can get it installed and verify the pricing is as I suspect it may be. The code has logic that makes sense as to why the discrepancy is there, but I don't want to jump the gun.
I guess I was more suggesting opening an issue to start a dialog with Tpruvot so he can take a look at it as well, since he is very familiar with it and why it was done the way it was. Maybe he has some insight that was overlooked. No sense in doing an entire install and start poking through it if he can tell you right away whats going on. If he doesn't support, that's fine, but he may have still have some input on it.
July 27, 2017, 12:10:24 PM
that looks kinda promising. I don't really understand how it comes into play but I'll see if we can.
July 27, 2017, 11:36:54 AM
I support this effort 100%. If you need anything from me, let me know.
Jaerin,
Why don't you file an issue here: https://github.com/tpruvot/yiimp/issues
If that goes well, you can then submit a pull request.
Crackfoo,
Can you please look into this? I would really like to know your thoughts.
I don't really want to report an issue until I have the full evidence to support that it actually is the issue. Not to mention Tpruvot doesn't really support the exchange portion of Yiimp so he may not care.
I will once I can get it installed and verify the pricing is as I suspect it may be. The code has logic that makes sense as to why the discrepancy is there, but I don't want to jump the gun.
July 27, 2017, 09:13:32 AM
I think I figured it out after looking at the Yiimp code. The relevant function that I believe is causing the issues is as follows:
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
return $value;
}
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
Code:
$price2 = ($m->Bid + $m->Ask)/2;
$market->price2 = AverageIncrement($market->price2, $price2);
$market->price = AverageIncrement($market->price, $m->Bid);
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
debuglog("AverageIncrement: $value1, $value2");
return $value;
}
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
I support this effort 100%. If you need anything from me, let me know.
Jaerin,
Why don't you file an issue here: https://github.com/tpruvot/yiimp/issues
If that goes well, you can then submit a pull request.
Crackfoo,
Can you please look into this? I would really like to know your thoughts.
July 26, 2017, 10:21:08 PM
I think I figured it out after looking at the Yiimp code. The relevant function that I believe is causing the issues is as follows:
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
return $value;
}
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
Code:
$price2 = ($m->Bid + $m->Ask)/2;
$market->price2 = AverageIncrement($market->price2, $price2);
$market->price = AverageIncrement($market->price, $m->Bid);
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
debuglog("AverageIncrement: $value1, $value2");
return $value;
}
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
Good work man, honestly i hope we can figure this stuff out and get back to normal payouts, i honestly want to stay on on this pool, because i am not a full time miner and need the mining operation to convert for me automatic when im busy working my normal 9to5 job... just hope crackfoo can get to the bottom of this....
July 26, 2017, 07:21:19 PM
I think I figured it out after looking at the Yiimp code. The relevant function that I believe is causing the issues is as follows:
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
In web\yaamp\core\backend\markets.php on line 203
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
return $value;
}
This function is used for pretty much every price lookup from the markets. The purpose of this function is to create a weighted value based upon 20% of value1 and 80% of value2. The reason for doing it is to create a trailing average for price moves. As an example in the price look up for any of the exchanges.
web\yaamp\core\exchange\bittrex.php on line 61-63
Code:
$price2 = ($m->Bid + $m->Ask)/2;
$market->price2 = AverageIncrement($market->price2, $price2);
$market->price = AverageIncrement($market->price, $m->Bid);
The purpose of this code is to first get the average of the Bid and Ask and put it in price2.
Next it sets the price2 value to the weighted value of the previous price2 and the current price2. This would be a 20% weight of the old price + 80% value of the new price.
Finally it sets the price value to the weighted value of the previous price and the current bid. This would be a 20% weight of the old bid + 80% value of the new bid.
On paper this seems reasonable because if the price fluctuates by a significant margin it will trail that value and essentially smooth the movement out.
This is significant because if you look at the AverageIncrement function and consider that if the previous price being passed in value1 does not exist then the function returns 80% of the current price2 or Bid. So I think what might be happening is somehow the object is falling out of scope or some other issue that is causing that value1 to get a 0 amount and therefore the values coming out are 80% of the value they should be.
As a workaround until it can be determined if the values are being passed incorrectly or falling out of scope a line to check if value1 is 0 and if it is return the value2 should work around the issue. I'm going to likely try and setup a Yiimp instance on a test VM and see if I can get values out of it to determine for sure if this is the problem.
I'll let you know what I find. Crackfoo if you want to perhaps add some debug logging like the following it may be quicker for you to see:
Code:
function AverageIncrement($value1, $value2)
{
$percent = 80;
$value = ($value1*(100-$percent) + $value2*$percent) / 100;
debuglog("AverageIncrement: $value1, $value2");
return $value;
}
Or report it to Tpruvot and see if he can look at it. I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the issues.
July 26, 2017, 07:16:05 PM
when using blake2s on zpool, is it possible to only mine verge or neva etc. ? thx
Nope, it's a multipool. It'll mine whatever it deems appropriate.
July 26, 2017, 07:01:48 PM
when using blake2s on zpool, is it possible to only mine verge or neva etc. ? thx
July 26, 2017, 04:33:05 PM
crackfoo,
Is there a exchange fee charged to us from going from mined coin to btc outside of the 2% pool fee. I am trying to understand things a little more, after seeing what Jaerin said. I went back and checked my last 50 earnings when they were exchanged. Not knowing the transaction data... after comparing them all 93% of the payouts i received based on share % of coins i mined based on website stated numbers were all below not only the period mined lows, but 93% of payouts were at rates below the 24hr exchange lows.
I am not sure what is going on, but i think something needs to be looked into, either the website is reporting wrong or an internal script is paying out with to much fee added to it. I really would hate to leave the pool, because i have supported the pool, so if you can look into this more for me and possibly resolve it i would love to continue supporting the pool and move all my rigs back over, but SIGT payouts just were not making sense. I prefer your pool, because i typically use a multi-algo setup on your pool and dislike having to exchange things myself.
Is there a exchange fee charged to us from going from mined coin to btc outside of the 2% pool fee. I am trying to understand things a little more, after seeing what Jaerin said. I went back and checked my last 50 earnings when they were exchanged. Not knowing the transaction data... after comparing them all 93% of the payouts i received based on share % of coins i mined based on website stated numbers were all below not only the period mined lows, but 93% of payouts were at rates below the 24hr exchange lows.
I am not sure what is going on, but i think something needs to be looked into, either the website is reporting wrong or an internal script is paying out with to much fee added to it. I really would hate to leave the pool, because i have supported the pool, so if you can look into this more for me and possibly resolve it i would love to continue supporting the pool and move all my rigs back over, but SIGT payouts just were not making sense. I prefer your pool, because i typically use a multi-algo setup on your pool and dislike having to exchange things myself.
I've been using the ZPool for a while now and I confirm your findings. Something seems off somewhere in the exchange process. I'd rather not move away either as I am doing ok here, but it's getting harder to justify staying. Maybe Crackfoo can look into this and let us know for sure.
July 26, 2017, 02:17:14 PM
Thank you I appreciate you saying this. Can you post what value you have YAAMP_FEES_EXCHANGE set to in your config? Or better yet any of the relevant fees settings in the server config? Perhaps there is a setting that should be .2 instead of 2 and that's causing the normal 2% to be 20%.
I'm looking over the Yiimp code and trying to determine if it is in fact a bug or some config that is set incorrectly.
As I mentioned before I don't think that anyone would protest to paying some fees for autoexchange as long as they were stated up front so someone could decide if the fee is worth the trouble or not.
YAAMP_FEES_EXCHANGE = 5
July 26, 2017, 02:13:36 PM
I understand, I made no complaints about it. It wasn't appropriate to discuss mining on other pools in this thread. I apologize.
thnx
ya'all are free to mine where ever you want.
I understand their are oddities, the exchange mode is not supported or tested by the maintainer but it is all open source and regardless pays more than other multipool IMO. I'm not a dev. I welcome changes if there are better way to run the exchange mode: https://github.com/tpruvot/yiimp
or of course, you can run your own.
Cheers
crackfoo,
Is there a exchange fee charged to us from going from mined coin to btc outside of the 2% pool fee. I am trying to understand things a little more, after seeing what Jaerin said. I went back and checked my last 50 earnings when they were exchanged. Not knowing the transaction data... after comparing them all 93% of the payouts i received based on share % of coins i mined based on website stated numbers were all below not only the period mined lows, but 93% of payouts were at rates below the 24hr exchange lows.
I am not sure what is going on, but i think something needs to be looked into, either the website is reporting wrong or an internal script is paying out with to much fee added to it. I really would hate to leave the pool, because i have supported the pool, so if you can look into this more for me and possibly resolve it i would love to continue supporting the pool and move all my rigs back over, but SIGT payouts just were not making sense. I prefer your pool, because i typically use a multi-algo setup on your pool and dislike having to exchange things myself.
July 26, 2017, 01:33:37 PM
Quote
Should look like that...
thank you
Quote
Just be aware that when you get paid out in other coins other than BTC it is not the same as though you are direct mining the coin. As the price of the coin/BTC pair changes the amount of coins you get will change because you are credited the mBTC value of the coin and then converted not paid directly what coins you mine. This is just a fact of how the auto exchange stuff working on Yiimp pools right now.
ah okay have to keep an eye on that, thanks
July 26, 2017, 01:20:40 PM
Just be aware that when you get paid out in other coins other than BTC it is not the same as though you are direct mining the coin. As the price of the coin/BTC pair changes the amount of coins you get will change because you are credited the mBTC value of the coin and then converted not paid directly what coins you mine. This is just a fact of how the auto exchange stuff working on Yiimp pools right now.
July 26, 2017, 01:16:40 PM
hi,
i am mining blake2s on zpool. i would like to get paid out in verge coins, this is my .bat:
ccminer -a blake2s -o stratum+tcp://blake2s.mine.zpool.ca:5766 -u my_verge_wallet -p c=XVG
is this right? when i check my wallet on zpool it shows me the values in Unobtanium(UNO)
. will i get paid in XVG in the end?
thx
Should look like that... i am mining blake2s on zpool. i would like to get paid out in verge coins, this is my .bat:
ccminer -a blake2s -o stratum+tcp://blake2s.mine.zpool.ca:5766 -u my_verge_wallet -p c=XVG
is this right? when i check my wallet on zpool it shows me the values in Unobtanium(UNO)
. will i get paid in XVG in the end? thx
July 26, 2017, 01:13:05 PM
hi,
i am mining blake2s on zpool. i would like to get paid out in verge coins, this is my .bat:
ccminer -a blake2s -o stratum+tcp://blake2s.mine.zpool.ca:5766 -u my_verge_wallet -p c=XVG-blake2s
is this right? when i check my wallet on zpool it shows me the values in Unobtanium(UNO). will i get paid in XVG in the end?
thx
i am mining blake2s on zpool. i would like to get paid out in verge coins, this is my .bat:
ccminer -a blake2s -o stratum+tcp://blake2s.mine.zpool.ca:5766 -u my_verge_wallet -p c=XVG-blake2s
is this right? when i check my wallet on zpool it shows me the values in Unobtanium(UNO)
. will i get paid in XVG in the end? thx
July 26, 2017, 12:55:17 PM
I understand, I made no complaints about it. It wasn't appropriate to discuss mining on other pools in this thread. I apologize.
thnx
ya'all are free to mine where ever you want.
I understand their are oddities, the exchange mode is not supported or tested by the maintainer but it is all open source and regardless pays more than other multipool IMO. I'm not a dev. I welcome changes if there are better way to run the exchange mode: https://github.com/tpruvot/yiimp
or of course, you can run your own.
Cheers
Thank you I appreciate you saying this. Can you post what value you have YAAMP_FEES_EXCHANGE set to in your config? Or better yet any of the relevant fees settings in the server config? Perhaps there is a setting that should be .2 instead of 2 and that's causing the normal 2% to be 20%.
I'm looking over the Yiimp code and trying to determine if it is in fact a bug or some config that is set incorrectly.
As I mentioned before I don't think that anyone would protest to paying some fees for autoexchange as long as they were stated up front so someone could decide if the fee is worth the trouble or not.
July 26, 2017, 12:42:44 PM
trying to configure miner
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sight_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGHT pay
is this correct?
also i got hash tap, but don't know what they are
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sight_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGHT pay
is this correct?
also i got hash tap, but don't know what they are
not quite right. the c= has to match what wallet you are using.
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=BTC -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sigt_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGT pay
July 26, 2017, 11:56:14 AM
trying to configure miner
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sight_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGHT pay
is this correct?
also i got hash tap, but don't know what they are
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sight_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGHT pay
is this correct?
also i got hash tap, but don't know what they are
not quite right. the c= has to match what wallet you are using.
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_btc_wallet -p c=BTC -i 25
this is for be payed in btc
-a skunk -o stratum+tcp://skunk.mine.zpool.ca:8433 -u my_sigt_wallet -p c=SIGT -i 25
this if SIGT pay
Jump to: