Topic: ▂▃▅▆▇⫷[ 🆉🅿🅾🅾🅻.🅲🅰 ]⫸⫷[!KAWPOW!]⫸⫷[ the miners multipool ]⫸ ▇▆▅▃▂ - page 204. (Read 279744 times)

The one I had issues with before was hmq1725 before the default diff was raised.  Also equihash somehow defaults to 200 (which is way too high), so I corrected that manually.

Then it was skein, which no one responded on:

"The hashrate for skein is off.  My miners are telling me they are hashing at 781 MH, but on the site I'm only seeing 57 MH.  One has 2x 1080 TI so it is getting 1.91 GH, but the site says 120 MH.

What's going on?"

I kind of gave up on following up after no one answered a 2nd post (got lost by the person screaming wolf).  But now I notice timetravel giving me hashrate issues.

I've been noticing my earnings isn't higher using the profit based method (multiple algos, factors, etc) compared to just mining on equihash only.  But I noticed it was on algos that were very low in profits and most likely because the % of shares is low due to the actual hashrate seen by the pool vs what's considered profitable by the miner based on hash rate of the miner (not on the pool side).

So now I am paying attention to the miner reported speed and what's being reported on the pool.  I give it about 5 minutes to "catch up" to see if the hashrate settles and get close to the reported hashrate on the miners.

PS:  No issues on the only 2 CPU algos (m7m and xevan).

It seems to be the nature of the Timetravel algorithm.  It seems like it won't accept any shares for a bit and then all of a sudden submit a ton of low difficulty shares all at once.  I don't think this is a pool problem because I've seen the same behavior on other pools I've tried Timetravel on as well.

Setting a fixed difficulty also doesn't seem to change this behavior much.  This leads me to believe it is something with how the shares are calculated or intended to be accepted by the pool.  It might be something with how it is coded in ccminer, but I'm not sure.  As for the difference between local and pool hashrate that is all up to the luck of which of your shares are being accepted.  If you're not seeing errors about shares being rejected then it is likely just unlucky hashing that has it down.  Overtime it will average out.

be sure diff is a proper multiple.   some algos don't like odd diffs, and some don't like fractions (decimals) for some reason.   Crackfoo may know more.

How many diffs did you try to set?    I noticed your issues on algos like the CPU mined low hashrate ones with 2-3 decimal places.

Hey, is anyone else getting under-reported hasrhate for timetravel?

My rig says I'm getting 137.81 MH/s (3x 1080 Ti), but according to the site I'm getting only 1.4 MH/s.

Is the difficulty too low?  Sometimes I get a blast of accepted shares.  I tried turning up the difficulty in the password, but the stratum still uses a low difficulty (ignores my custom difficulty).

correct.

Feel free to PM me with any issues/questions, or email me the same username at gmail =)

The link to his batch is in his sig.

I find this thread highly entertaining.

EDIT:  The post above me was deleted.

I set my miner up just to test and see why my miner would show a very low hash rate this should be self explanatory, looks like one of the fast moving coins may be causing this issue who knows?

I have "failover-only" : true,


Time mining 31m30s


Pool                         URL                                                   User                    Status             Diff                 GetWorks   Priority     Accepted
0       stratum+tcp://scrypt.mine.zpool.ca:3433                                              Alive             65.5K                   234           0            200
1       stratum+tcp://scrypt.mine.zpool.ca:3433                                              Alive             65.5K                    27            1            34

Ah I think that I understand. Cheers for the quick and positive reply too. So equihash currently seems to be mining around 80-200Ksol total at the moment, therefore it would take 5-10 times or even more mining hash before it would be worth making it active, if I understand right. Looking at the difficulty zcash seems much higher than the other equihash coins, and I see 2days per block estimated at the time of writing. I can just imagine some complaints if people were mining it and waiting 3 days for the block revenue, even though in one way it's funny, some people may just not understand that zcash wouldn't pay out as fast, hence it not being included.

In terms of switching I'm currently using 4 minutes per algo check, can anyone recommend a setting that in their opinion could work better ? 60-90 seconds to me means that too much time is lost switching and the mining program working up to full speed, whereas something like 10 minutes could leave another algo potentially unmined that's currently getting good figures, although maybe it could work ?

I'm very happy, I put the remaining deposit on my 2nd 1080ti today, it should arrive sometime in the next 3-4 days. I was thinking of trying steady mining on one coin with it, whilst algo switching with the other, or would people recommend using both for algo switching ? And if I was to steady mine on one card, even though many miners prolly don't wish to divulge their secrets (!), maybe someone could recommend a method for doing that, or maybe try just mining 2 different algo's with seperate cards ? More cards = more options lol.

Cheers crackfoo for the explanation, and gratz on a great pool that I hope continues to increase in reputation and profitability for you and the pool's users.

Any response on how to effectively use 2 cards to mine on zpool with either split steady, algo switching, or a combination of the 2 would be highly appreciated for a new miner. Thanks !

That's a cool idea, didn't think about that.   I saw your batch script posted in the middle of some other post, but could never really find it again.  I used Nemo's batch version for a while until I switched to multipoolminer and got that running pretty solid.

One reason using the pool to direct things I'd expect is there might be some logic to moving when work is finished rather than one a 1 minute timer.

Truncated above, and noted something that already exists for some time now  Only, I did it with the batch itself to make it a LOT more efficient, not modifying ccminer.    I myself know how trust works in the real world, and thus, id rather release something that carries the utmost in transparency of operation.  Compiling or re-coding a separate miner isn't along those lines.... so I avoided doing that.... especially since miner apps go through so many changes over time;  I would have to go in and do those every time they came up.  Too much work;  not something i'm trying to do for free constantly... lol

Yeah;  I've tried many pools myself; and zpool has been the best all-around.  It may have more issues come up than other pools that I have used (aside from nicehash whom keeps their customer complaints silent and separate from here);  but issues that are major, or at least the ones that have basis of standing... get handled very reasonably quick.  Nicehash has far fewer problems, because they are simply running a stratum... nothing else that a typical pool runs... and all the other stuff they don't do, is what seems to have the most issues (wallets going offline, etc etc etc).

I try to keep patience; but;  this recent guy really struck a nerve, and it is behavior like his that got the first thread locked out and screwed us out of easy communication with crackfoo and fellow pool users.  The "one bad apple" spoiling the bunch kinda thing.

I wouldn't doubt it.  This guy is going to get taken for all his money by some "developer" that will promise to make what he is asking for.  The problem is much of this stuff is only kinda full written and none of the different pieces likely integrate with one another seamlessly.  I wouldn't doubt if there is a number of hacks and scripts that are written to kludge things together.

People just don't seem to realize how much you lose in all the different inefficiencies of the process.  The hashrate you see on your miner isn't really what you are getting on the pool because that's the nature of mining.  Which means your expected returns are at best a guess of what you can hope.  Then every time the miner switches between algorithms you aren't mining anything at all until your next miner can get up to speed.  30-60 seconds switching miners doesn't seem like a lot, but many times over 24 hours it really will add up to a good chunk of your earnings.  Those loss of efficiencies aren't measured in the estimates at all to my knowledge.   Add on top of that the likely loss of some earnings in conversion rates and price changes it is not at all surprising that you see 20-30% less than what you expect.  Then you get days like when Bitcore was going nuts and your earnings are through the roof for those couple of days and you wish things were like that every day.  The fact is everything is a moving target and if you just mined around on some different pools you'd see that generally speaking zpool pays out pretty damn good, especially for how easy it is and how reliably the payouts are.

If someone wants to make it much more efficient, hack up a version of ccminer that has the efficient miners of each of the algorithms and come up with a way to switch between them quickly.  Better yet a way to let the mining pool be able to shift you around to different algorithms automatically without having to cycle through multiple miners.   That's what multipoolminer tries to do from the miner side, but I bet there would be some gains if the pool could direct it especially for the harder to find blocks that might be highly profitable.  If the pool could coordinate all the miners together to go for the longer blocks the pay might be better at times, but when everyone goes in 155 different directions there is almost no chance of mining those things.  

I admit I've complained in the past and didn't understand how it all worked, not even a month ago, but I do understand now.  There will be more profitable places to mine than zpool when the markets are sideways, but not without effort paying attention to what is easy to mine vs how much it pays and dealing with getting it on and off the exchanges.  Even then things can turn south quickly and you may end up holding garbage or maybe you get lucky and hold gold, but if you want a steady paycheck zpool is about as good as it gets.

OMG....  I bet crackfoo is lol-ing inside pretty hard when he sees this.

Id love to see him set up one coinbox and stratum to mine to... let alone the pool code and multiple coins/algos....  I personally had trouble just setting up a solo wallet to mine to TBH.... and I am usually pretty damned good with vague or complicated instructions.

...not to mention the amount of computer and internet resources necessary to host a pool such as zpool.  If i'm not mistaken, one of zpool's servers cost quite a pretty penny just in hardware....

I'm LOLing pretty hard at this...

Sorry, but the gloves had to come off... I myself haven't been on BCT much the past week;  been having RL issues to deal with that are very unpleasant.

Synopsis:
Some people are just so thick headed that they get things in their head that are really not as they perceive.

But honestly, not much has happened.  Just people kicking and screaming because they are counting their chickens before they hatch or didnt take the time to understand what they are doing by reading the available materials.  My final post just above yours should pretty much explain it....

I left the thread for one afternoon and what the heck happened...

At what point does an estimate become reality?  Never.  It's an estimate.


English Dictionary:
es·ti·mate
verb
ˈestəˌmāt

1) roughly calculate or judge the value, number, quantity, or extent of.
2) an approximate calculation or judgment of the value, number, quantity, or extent of something.

Where is the confusion with this word?  The dictionary is pretty $#%@# concise.

Have I made the definition of the word you are using perfectly clear for you to understand yet?

problem is that somebody here proclaming that he is 66 more profitable and in fact he only stealing money thats reason why i need to point so peopole can read it.....do not be retarded or you sharing profits with this easy stealer? lol

seems believable considering it happened before;  and without credit to the original authors again.......  *cough*


Again;  you need to read the several replies above this one.  It was described to you by several people in different ways each time.

p=MAC means: your PAYOUT COIN IS MAC.  It means NOTHING ELSE.

You are mining on "AN ALGORITHM", not mining "A COIN".  You are only choosing to get paid in "A COIN" other than BTC.

Does this make sense to you yet?

You can't solo mine a coin.  You can point it at an algorithm and ask to be paid out in a coin, but you are credited the mBTC value of the coin.  If the value fluctuates you will get less or maybe even more than you mined.  If you want to solo mine zpool is not the pool for you.  Mine on Yiimp.



First off Nemos miner is just a ripped off version of Aaronsace's Multipoolminer.  Its not even Nemo's code.  Get the real one and use that
https://github.com/aaronsace/MultiPoolMiner

Second the hashrate shown local on your miner is the rate of hashes being checked locally.  Not all those hashes are accepted by the pool.  The hashes that are accepted have a difficulty associated with them and that is what credits you with hashrate on the pool.  If you are lucky you will find high difficulty hash quickly and that can show your hashrate higher on the pool than your local or if you are unlucky you will find low difficulty hashes and your hashrate will be lower on the pool.  There is nothing you can do to change this luck other than to increase your hashrate and that will increase your average accepted shares.  Internet latency can also have a significant impact on your accepted shares because the longer it takes to get new work the less new work you can process.

With that said the estimates you see on Multipoolminer is just an estimate of approximately what you could be getting if the hashing maintains a fixed level and the price stays the same until the coins are confirmed.  Also switching between algos costs time and therefore potential earnings.  If you have it set to 1 minute checks and it switches 100 times in a day that is likely going to be at least 100 minutes of mining time wasted doing nothing.  
None of these things are possible to predict and therefore it is an ESTIMATE.  It is more the ideal situation possible.  Take the same miner and point it towards Yiimp or another pool and you'll see fluctuations in the amount of payout you get there too.

Third mining is very much LUCK based.  Just like the pool hash to compete for finding blocks, not all those blocks are equal.  The blocks will usually pay out about the same amount per block found, but hte amount of hashing power to find each block can vary greatly.  This is just like the hashing I mentioned above.  So your ESTIMATES from your miner as just that.  Estimates.  If you download the latest pull from the actual Multipoolminer you will see that these estimates now have a margin of error associated with them, unlike Nemo's ripped off version.