Author

Topic: Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB - page 261. (Read 1061894 times)

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
That being said, according to the transaction list of blockchain.info, there are really not a lot of transactions being sent with no fees.

Not that blockchain.info knows about. Since the best way to get no-fee transactions into a block is to send them directly to the miners, I wouldn't expect blockchain.info to know about many of them.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Do you limit the number of non-transaction fee transfers per block?
Yes, every miner does AFAIK.
full member
Activity: 157
Merit: 100
Hi this thread moves so fast that my question got missed about 10 pages back.

Do you limit the number of non-transaction fee transfers per block?

Thanks.

I don't know their rule for sure. However, they do claim to use a spam filter to filter out certain transactions. For certain, most of the last few blocks do not contain a lot of feeless transaction. However, this block that we found 2 hours ago contains two feeless transaction, so their rule cannot be "only one free transaction".

That being said, according to the transaction list of blockchain.info, there are really not a lot of transactions being sent with no fees. I'm not surprised, they take several hours to confirm.



However, a special rule that Eligius DOES enforce that other miners don't do is that they only allow a single transaction to a given address per block, to discourage address reuse, because there are some people currently trying to create an address blacklist/whitelist, something wizkid and luke-jr consider a bad thing for bitcoin. If address are not reused, and a new address is created for each transaction, then such list cannot work.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1045
Hi this thread moves so fast that my question got missed about 10 pages back.

Do you limit the number of non-transaction fee transfers per block?

Thanks.
member
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
Disclosure:
...
This will only work if you signed at least one settings message using MtGox's sign-message feature.
Any suggestions on how to reliably identify other MtGox addresses, or prove owners, is welcome. ...
Nice catch. Thankyou Luke/Wk
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 2334
I fix broken miners. And make holes in teeth :-)
Ouch, I didn't even think about that back-stop, nice catch Luke and Wk.

I've actually made an error in my wallet on a config file and mined into the ether for an hour or so. It's a weird thought for that on a larger scale.

C
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Disclosure:

I've just compiled a list of all addresses that have used MtGox's proprietary variant of the sign-message feature.
When wizkid057 returns home in an hour, the plan is to suspend payouts for these addresses until further resolution.
This will only work if you signed at least one settings message using MtGox's sign-message feature.
Any suggestions on how to reliably identify other MtGox addresses, or prove owners, is welcome.

Please note that we still cannot move balances between addresses, so do not depend on being able to recover bitcoins mined to MtGox addresses.
If you want your payouts on another address, begin mining with that new address immediately to ensure you are paid.

Merely making claims is of no value, so please don't bother trying.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).
It is first in, first out. But often slower miners don't reach their minimum payouts immediately. They don't lose their queue position just because they haven't met that requirement, so once they do meet it, they get inserted in the position they hold.

OK, I understand that. FCFS starting with last payment. Makes sense.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).

The queue is always sorted by how much time one has recieveid it's most recent payent, in increasing order.

So if you were a position 1, with your last payment 1 day ago, and while you are une the queue, a user crosses his payment treshold, and had his last payment 1 week ago, he'll be in position 1 and you'll be in position 2.

What if it's your first payment? From the time you start mining?

I believe that in fact, the system orders the payout by their oldest unpaid share. It doesn't change anything if you have already recieved a payout, since a payout clears your balance, your oldest unpaid share will be just after the payment.

But if it is your first payout, then your balance age is when you started mining.

Makes sense. Thanks.
full member
Activity: 157
Merit: 100
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).

The queue is always sorted by how much time one has recieveid it's most recent payent, in increasing order.

So if you were a position 1, with your last payment 1 day ago, and while you are une the queue, a user crosses his payment treshold, and had his last payment 1 week ago, he'll be in position 1 and you'll be in position 2.

What if it's your first payment? From the time you start mining?

I believe that in fact, the system orders the payout by their oldest unpaid share. It doesn't change anything if you have already recieved a payout, since a payout clears your balance, your oldest unpaid share will be just after the payment.

But if it is your first payout, then your balance age is when you started mining.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).

The queue is always sorted by how much time one has recieveid it's most recent payent, in increasing order.

So if you were a position 1, with your last payment 1 day ago, and while you are une the queue, a user crosses his payment treshold, and had his last payment 1 week ago, he'll be in position 1 and you'll be in position 2.

What if it's your first payment? From the time you start mining?
full member
Activity: 157
Merit: 100
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).

The queue is always sorted by how much time one has recieveid it's most recent payent, in increasing order.

So if you were a position 1, with your last payment 1 day ago, and while you are une the queue, a user crosses his payment treshold, and had his last payment 1 week ago, he'll be in position 1 and you'll be in position 2.

With any other method, people would have an incentive to put their payment the lowest to get into the queue more ofter an skip everybody. With the current method, a user may chose to place a higher treshold for his payout, recieveing money less time, but "in exchange", he knows that his payment will have a better priority in the queue.
full member
Activity: 157
Merit: 100
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).

The queue is always sorted by how much time one has recieveid it's most recent payent, in increasing order.

So if you were a position 1, with your last payment 1 day ago, and while you are une the queue, a user crosses his payment treshold, and had his last payment 1 week ago, he'll be in position 1 and you'll be in position 2.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).
It is first in, first out. But often slower miners don't reach their minimum payouts immediately. They don't lose their queue position just because they haven't met that requirement, so once they do meet it, they get inserted in the position they hold.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
Can somebody explain what the deal is with moving into worse position in the queue?  Wouldn't it make more sense for the queue to be like an actual queue (first in, first out).


hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
I got Satoshi's avatar!
I've been creeping down the payment queue all day.
When I went in to it I was at 880'th position, now around 10 hours later I am at 1113'rd.
There have been 21 or 22 blocks in front of me all this time.
Hopefully WK knows about this?
I guess I'm not the only one affected.

1DNqNN7TaauTSnaxigXNx11nntDBxLwS7n

1Nbq has a bunch of payments waiting... about 6 blocks worth in a row, so it'll probably back the queue up a little... when CPPSRB goes into fail-safe mode the automatic payments are halted and WK has to come in and clear it up manually... afaik
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1001
Don't look at my signature!
I've been creeping down the payment queue all day.
When I went in to it I was at 880'th position, now around 10 hours later I am at 1113'rd.
There have been 21 or 22 blocks in front of me all this time.
Hopefully WK knows about this?
I guess I'm not the only one affected.

1DNqNN7TaauTSnaxigXNx11nntDBxLwS7n

He tends to clear a load of blocks out of the queue by doing manual payments if it gets too backlogged..we pretty much..without fail..get paid once per day...on the odd occasion it skips a day and we get 1 large or 2,3,4 payments to catch up.
No concerns here.
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
I've been creeping down the payment queue all day.
When I went in to it I was at 880'th position, now around 10 hours later I am at 1113'rd.
There have been 21 or 22 blocks in front of me all this time.
Hopefully WK knows about this?
I guess I'm not the only one affected.

1DNqNN7TaauTSnaxigXNx11nntDBxLwS7n
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 2334
I fix broken miners. And make holes in teeth :-)
Yes, however I have been waiting to re-enter the payout queue for several blocks now. I was in the queue last night after a "19 block delay", something's up.

I'm sure it will be fixed, I trust Wk.

C
Usually Wk makes manual payouts after stats problems like this one.
The queue should normalize again after that.
Indeed. I seem to be back in queue, 19 blocks back. Once again, not a big deal he'll fix it eventually (highly understanding this is a side business for him)
hero member
Activity: 619
Merit: 500
Yes, however I have been waiting to re-enter the payout queue for several blocks now. I was in the queue last night after a "19 block delay", something's up.

I'm sure it will be fixed, I trust Wk.

C
Usually Wk makes manual payouts after stats problems like this one.
The queue should normalize again after that.
Jump to: