Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 # - page 115. (Read 458370 times)

You have a stats page here: http://eligi.us/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/19yjd6FFXuhWcDUEAAF8uroyRXTDveLP3r

Increasing your rate would involve either clocking your GPU higher or throwing more hardware at mining. Likely the easiest way would be to buy a better GPU.

Ok, now I'm mining on Host: mining.eligius.st at Port 8337 Password 1. If I'm mining at roughly 120 Mhash/s how long would it take to appear on the Pool statistics page. Is there anyway to increase my Mhash rate?

I wrote a fix for it, but the author apparently prefers it broken.
Maybe more people asking to get it fixed on the pull request will get it some attention.

welp, mystery solved I was using guiminer. They should really fix that eventually.

If you're using guiminer and stratum then its not actually sending shares to the pool because guiminer/poclbm is broken. This is why stratum is not suggested for guiminer.

Edit: looks like this was noted on the Eligius site under guiminer for a while now.

-wk

nope the address I'm using is 19yjd6FFXuhWcDUEAAF8uroyRXTDveLP3r and I have that entered under username. the host I'm using is stratum.mining.eligius.st and the port I'm using is 3334. I was told that the password shouldn't matter so I just used 1.

You're doing something wrong.  Check you haven't put the {} around your Bitcoin address (username). 

I keep on hitting new record highs in my shelved shares amount 

Must bring in a few more behemoths to help out.

What are people thoughts on Eligius and how long does it take to be logged into the pool statistics. I've been mining nonstop for about a week with 2x Radeon 4870 mining at 150 Mhash/s and have probably contributed slightly over 10000 shares and yet theres no mention of when I will be paid. Thoughts?

(I was writing this before Luke-Jr replied, so, I'll post it anyway)

Eligius hasn't seen a positive buffer since.... hmm.... at least a year.  So, buffer amount is essentially 0.

Fortunately this doesn't effect CPPSRB, since past miners' earnings don't affect active miners' earnings, like it did with the old SMPPS system where current miners would constantly struggle to catch up old extra credit.

It should be expected that, on average, any pool with 0% fee and a reward system that pays fairly would not have a buffer and instead would be continuously battling against long rounds and stale/orphaned blocks.  Again, with Eligius and CPPSRB, this doesn't really hurt miners at all.  Active miners will always have shares in the top 25 BTC of the CPPSRB share log, and will always be paid as much as possible from the blocks found.
And the shelved shares make it so that subsequent lucky rounds catch up the unlucky round's shares in a Last-in-first-out way.  Overall, under CPPSRB, Eligius has managed to stay at or very close to 100% PPS.

In any case, the buffer amount is in fact exposed in the API files for the blocks.  If you look at the bottom of latest.json, you'll see a field labeled funds.  That is the amount, in base units (satoshi), that the pool has to add to the next block reward.  Right now it fluctuates around from 0 to about 1000 satoshi, since not all shares always add up to exactly 25 BTC (vardiff, old shares with different values, etc).  I don't expect this to change, since it is highly improbably (especially with the rising difficulty) that the older extra credit/shelved shares will ever be fully paid.

-wk

It's been 0 BTC for months now.
Probably won't ever have excess to build one.

Is the buffer amount published anywhere?

Running behind on my maintenance/updates from my announcement yesterday.  Getting to it now.  Stats will be off and on for the next few hours, but, I will make sure to limit any impact to mining.  Shares are all recorded, and reward system will catch up and such, as per usual, so nothing is lost.

Thanks,

-wk

Yeah, which is nice.  Although Eligius is a special case, since if this were to happen on Eligius it would go towards the old SMPPS "extra credit" (which will probably take a while to cut into.)  At some point I may call to vote cutting SMPPS loose all together, as much as that may bother some.

I like CPPSRB and almost used it on my TRC pool, but one other difference to remember is if you hit the lucky short rounds in a row and there's no backlog to pay, those extra coins to put into the pool buffer instead of immediately paid out (like DGM/PPLNS would do).

But the variance is far less.

Only if you keep mining with them.
I think CPPSRB does the best job regardless of continual mining.

I have been mining here the past week since I got my blades.  I was initially skeptical because there were a few days of like 17 hours where no blocks were found.   However, it has evened out and I get regular payments.  It has thus far been very reliable and I am squeezing every bitcent out of these two blades (about .9 coins a day now).

I understand what you mean, but that's still variance - it could have happened the other way around. All I'm saying is that any fair reward method must approach paying each share the expected amount over time.

Yes, they average to paying out, but what about difficulty retargets? For example, I mined for about 24 hours on BTCGuild on June 4th. As you can see on the stats page, that was an unlucky day, averaging like 135 satoshis per share instead of the 195 that I would have got with PPS.

You understand statistics better than me, but if I get it correctly, the only way for me to compensate the unlucky time would be to keep mining until a lucky time pays for the difference. But what if the difficulty has gone from 12M to 15M in between? Doesn't it add a bias?

In other words, isn't the rationale of "average" only applicable for miners that have been mining forever on the same pool, and will keep mining forever on the same pool? And isn't the problem in practice that you can start unlucky and never be able to "compensate"? I admit I'm not 100% clear about this.

If you want to redirect me to an exisiting topic, or create a new topic for that, I would continue the discussion over there to avoid going off-topic on the thread of Eligius.

There is variance, you mention here yourself:



This is a bit confusing - other systems don't use shelved shares, and all systems average to paying out the expected amount per submitted share.