Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 # - page 147. (Read 458255 times)
June 11, 2012, 05:21:07 PM
This is odd, it works fine on p2pool... Trying now BTCGuid and also have about 30MH/s reported on pool side and 150MH/s on miner side O_o
June 11, 2012, 04:09:52 PM
Something is odd there.
I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
Code:
(5s):105.5 (avg):146.2 Mh/s | Q:2795 A:176 R:1 HW:0 E:6% U:0.16/m
TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
How is this possible that pool telling me that I have only about 10MH/s average???TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
Your miner seems faulty , look at all the DW compared to Accepted shares , your U is far too low aswell at 100mh you should have a U of 1.397 and yours is 0.16 which means you are submitting shares to the pool at roughly 10-12mh and not 100mh.
Lastly, whats up with your efficiency? 6% ? All of this points to something faulty on your side unfortunately.
June 11, 2012, 04:08:33 PM
Something is odd there.
I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
Do you have multiple pools defined in CGMiner? I think you need to set --failover-only or something or else it will "leak" work to secondary pools. I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
Code:
(5s):105.5 (avg):146.2 Mh/s | Q:2795 A:176 R:1 HW:0 E:6% U:0.16/m
TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
How is this possible that pool telling me that I have only about 10MH/s average???TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
June 11, 2012, 02:25:10 PM
Something is odd there.
I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
I point my miner to pool and after about 20hrs get stats:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/7/1Q6igQVdYrxLKy5qJBXAEsSn91S1Zhnoii
Most strange thing is that miner shows:
Code:
(5s):105.5 (avg):146.2 Mh/s | Q:2795 A:176 R:1 HW:0 E:6% U:0.16/m
TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
How is this possible that pool telling me that I have only about 10MH/s average???TQ: 1 ST: 2 SS: 0 DW: 336 NB: 115 LW: 0 GF: 1 RF: 4
June 10, 2012, 08:46:17 PM
We just finished a 23h57m round.
June 08, 2012, 08:32:39 AM
http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/Shared_Maximum_PPS also describes the variants.
The link I posted links to that page, and I looked at it, but didn't scroll down. Where's the facepalm emoticon? June 08, 2012, 01:29:45 AM
I'm actually surprised it didn't come earlier.
Would be pro. I already see the pool hashrate down. New people might help it a little.
If this goes on for too long, I might consider "upgrading" to ESMPPS just so new miners don't feel like they're losing out. Thoughts?
Would be pro. I already see the pool hashrate down. New people might help it a little.
June 07, 2012, 08:00:45 PM
http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/Shared_Maximum_PPS also describes the variants.
June 07, 2012, 05:08:48 PM
I don't think you included a link in your post about going to ESMPPS pointing to information on the two systems. This would make it easier for incredibly lazy bums who don't want to (or average joes who don't know where to) search for information on the difference between the two systems.
ETA: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools (and you thought I was one of those people)
This page links to Eligius's definition of SMPPS and a post about ESMPPS in a thread on this forum. I guess I'd get paid the same amount at the end of the day, but with a low hashrate and more old work, I'm not sure which I like better. I say we just get back to the other side of the luck.
ETA: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools (and you thought I was one of those people)
This page links to Eligius's definition of SMPPS and a post about ESMPPS in a thread on this forum. I guess I'd get paid the same amount at the end of the day, but with a low hashrate and more old work, I'm not sure which I like better. I say we just get back to the other side of the luck.
June 07, 2012, 02:32:45 PM
with the recently very poor luck, I'd be interested in how many blocks are we "behind". Is there some way to get info about negative buffer size? A graph would be cool (I like graphs), but numbers will suffice.
There is currently approximately 1000 BTC worth of extra credit issued.Considering Eligius's history of above-average luck, and often peaking out over 1000 BTC buffered, this seems pretty normal/expected.
For comparison, another pool member noted yesterday that p2pool's luck works out to 2400 BTC behind.
If this goes on for too long, I might consider "upgrading" to ESMPPS just so new miners don't feel like they're losing out. Thoughts?
June 07, 2012, 02:17:44 PM
Uh oh.
DDoS. Working on it, should be back online soon.Funny stuff. I remember you saying the other day Eligius would be harder to DDOS than P2Pool yet now I see p2pool still working.
I have nothing to do with the DDOS BTW. Just an observation and you got proved wrong ...
Fair point. Did you find out why / who was DDOSing ? Called the FEDs ?
June 07, 2012, 02:13:58 PM
Hey,
with the recently very poor luck, I'd be interested in how many blocks are we "behind". Is there some way to get info about negative buffer size? A graph would be cool (I like graphs), but numbers will suffice.
Thanks
with the recently very poor luck, I'd be interested in how many blocks are we "behind". Is there some way to get info about negative buffer size? A graph would be cool (I like graphs), but numbers will suffice.
Thanks
June 07, 2012, 02:01:19 PM
Uh oh.
DDoS. Working on it, should be back online soon.Funny stuff. I remember you saying the other day Eligius would be harder to DDOS than P2Pool yet now I see p2pool still working.
I have nothing to do with the DDOS BTW. Just an observation and you got proved wrong ...
June 07, 2012, 01:52:14 PM
Uh oh.
DDoS. Working on it, should be back online soon.Funny stuff. I remember you saying the other day Eligius would be harder to DDOS than P2Pool yet now I see p2pool still working.
I have nothing to do with the DDOS BTW. Just an observation and you got proved wrong ...
June 06, 2012, 08:38:22 PM
Uh oh.
DDoS. Working on it, should be back online soon. 
June 06, 2012, 08:21:11 PM
Uh oh. Artefact server down?
Code:
500 Internal Server Error
nginx/0.8.54
nginx/0.8.54
June 05, 2012, 11:00:11 PM
Can the new address type be used for regular transactions, or is it limited to multisig transaction types only?
Pretty much any kind of transaction, even non-standard ones. 
June 05, 2012, 09:37:26 PM
Can the new address type be used for regular transactions, or is it limited to multisig transaction types only?
June 05, 2012, 08:40:01 PM
Anyone want to test our fancy new donation address? 31igiusSdShicXmGAbJHNJuit1rzuJYKzF (requires 0.6.0+)
I could be tempted if the unlucky streak is broken sooner rather than later
June 05, 2012, 10:00:40 AM
Anyone want to test our fancy new donation address? 31igiusSdShicXmGAbJHNJuit1rzuJYKzF (requires 0.6.0+)
Jump to: