Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 # - page 92. (Read 458370 times)

A while back I remember reading a couple of posts that were relative to this question. After searching the hell out of the forum with no luck, Ill feel better if I ask so its clear.

1)
In the [Configurable Options] section: after inputting data into the sections that are appropriate to me I Submit Changes and the page returns blank (as if I made no changes / default)  Now I am aware of the notice:

You may set all options now, and they will take effect as backend support is completed!

Which leads me to believe that my config'ed options were saved but not showing. Am I wrong?

One of the reasons I was concerned of these options not being saved is adjusting my minimum payout. I know there has been a lot of discussion on minimum payouts, payment queues and I do not want to invoke friction or be flammed by mentioning this or perhaps missing a post or something in the FAQ. This leads me to my second question.

2)
I am a small time miner, I set my minimum payout to the lowest allowed (0.01048576) Now that I have exceeded this minimum balance I am concerned that I am still set at the default minimum (0.16777216). I know it can take time to see your address in the payout queue etc, etc etc I have read all of that but having the Estimated Position in Payout Queue staring in my face telling me that I still have 0.15 left till payout which will take at least another 1 month, 3 weeks, 2 days and 6 hours at current network difficulty of 112628548.67 is disheartening and lead me to inquire with all of your fine folks.

Last and not least, special thanks to LukeJr and Wizkid for their hard work in this pool. Special thanks to all the contributors that answer questions to other in this thread. I enjoy following the thread and mining on this pool over other pools. The clean cut basic interface yet specific graphs was something that attracted me and much more. Cheers

lol now i saw this block:
http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/blockinfo.php/00000000000000074ef0fb6f18e367b64fee580b6590c7e14c6a93d594390474

so fast that it was not included in payment, too bad the next are way above diff.

I have a suggestion for wizkid057 and luke, if possible to make a differend Eligius Offline Wallet that way we'll have access to that information, because from the current address http://blockchain.info/address/18d3HV2bm94UyY4a9DrPfoZ17sXuiDQq2B it is not clear what part of the funds are for the pool.

do I need to change anything for the Setting new difficulty for avalon?

It is fine when it's me alone. I just run one instance per blade and point each blade at a different proxy.

However, I am also experimenting with some cloud getwork->stratum proxy servers for other people to connect to. See:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3127181

However, there isn't a way to automatically split incoming users to different proxies. So what happens is that people all tend to connect to the same port. It's slightly annoying with BTCGuild & Slush since it ends up with 128- or 256- difficulty proxies, but it would be MUCH worse if those proxies run at 1 (since I have to pay for the bandwidth). Hence, currently I can't open those cloud proxies for Eligius.

I guess I could create some sort of registration mechanism and give each user a different port, but that sounds too much like work...

I may also one day rewrite the proxy server to do per-user mapping (or rather do it a Stratum->Stratum redirect proxy once I understand the Stratum protocol better), but again I'm not quite there yet either.

I was just hoping for a quick fix to provide Eligius support in the mean time.

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but what exactly is wrong with option c? Is separate accounts per blade a requirement?

This is behaving exactly as I would expect.
Stratum doesn't "really" support multiple users on a single connection: it uses the same jobs and difficulty for all of them.
While the jobs are easily split up by your proxy, there is simply no way to express different difficulties per user/worker.
Since Eloipool tracks difficulty per user/worker, it doesn't even try and always sends the (pool's) minimum difficulty if there are multiple users/workers on a connection.
The only reasonable solution I can see to this problem, is to use the lowest difficulty of all users.

Eloipool doesn't know or care whether two usernames have the same address or not.

That makes perfect sense. Thanks!

Ok, so I have more news on the 'ADDRESS' vs. 'ADDRESS_worker' issue.

It seems what happens is this:
a) If I funnel 4 blades through 1 stratum/getwork proxy server with 4 different user accounts *, I get the issue where they all stay at difficulty "1".
b) If I funnel 4 blades through 1 stratum/getwork proxy server with the same user account, they'll VARDIFF up to 16.
c) If I use 1 proxy server per blade under 1 user account, everything works fine, and they VARDIFF up to 4 or 8 within a few minutes.

* Actually, I've only tried different workers - don't know yet what will happen with multiple wallet addresses. I'll try that next.

So it seems like somehow the pool doesn't like multiple user accounts coming from a single (IP+Port) endpoint. Other pools also don't really work great with this, e.g. BTCGuild & Slush will ignore the individual user accounts, and just VARDIFF you on the overall endpoint. Eligius is unique though by not adjusting the VARDIFF at all in the single ENDPOINT-multiple users case.

I've worked around it for now, but I am running a free Stratum/Getwork cloud-based proxy currently for BTCGuild + Slush. I'd like to open it up to Eligius, but can't do that if there can't be multiple users per endpoint. Otherwise all my users will get a "1" difficulty.

It's a "bug" in the stratum protocol, which use bdifficulty instead of pdifficulty.
Pdifficulty 1 (standard for pools) is defined as a target with 32 leading zero bits.
Bdifficulty 1 is the same, after being truncated in a 24+8 bit floating point format ("bits", also used in blocks).
Eligius uses pdifficulty, since it can be stored cleanly in 4 bits instead of 32 (remember it needs to store the difficulty for every share).

BFGMiner also consistently displays pdifficulty correctly.

It's on mining_proxy, not BFGMINER (the actual miner itself is an ASICMINER blade). It's still showed "Diff 0" after almost 3 hours.

I just tried logging in again as 'ADDRESS' instead of 'ADDRESS_worker'.

In that case VARDIFF updates within a couple of minutes. Switching back to 'ADDRESS_worker' and it stays at 0-ish (see-below).


So it seems like the 'ADDRESS_worker' configuration has a larger bug that this - it's not just that it will only calculate individually, it won't update VARDIFF at all, staying at 1.



As far as my difficulty display of "0" is concerned, it is actually 1. For small values of 1...

Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
Setting new difficulty: 3.99993896484
Ughm. Doing our floating point math on a Pentium, are we? 

When it gets up to 8 however, it works:
Setting new difficulty: 8

Not sure if this is an Eligius bug or a mining_proxy bug. However, neither Slush nor BTCGuild shows a non-integer difficulty update on the same mining_proxy software.

With 30GH/s going through BFGMiner to Eligius, it takes a few minutes to go from Diff 0 to Diff 8 - BFG complains about work underruns, and then difficulty seems to go up.  How it works I don't know.

I read somewhere that with the _workername change, there is an issue with the VARDIFF being individually calculated rather than aggregated (though I think it should be individually calculated, but anyway).


However...

My miners were all running at "diff 16", so I've changed all of them from just being ADDRESS to ADDRESS_worker about 30 minutes ago specifically so that they don't aggregate.

But now it's just submitting "diff 0" shares according to mining_proxy. (What is a "diff 0" difficulty anyway - never seen that before?).


The minimum that I've set it to in the configuration UI is 8. Of course, that's set for ADDRESS and not ADDRESS_worker, so I'm not sure whether the UI option is supposed to work, but either way, I did expect VARDIFF to automatically update to around 8 by now for my new "ADDRESS_worker" style shares.

How long does it take for Eligius's VARDIFF to update?

This is a zero fee pool as far as charging a percentage of your earnings , but the the pool keeps the tx fees for expenses and such. Block rewards are divided according to work load the pool doesn't keep any of the 25 BTC from the block. I think I am saying this correctly  I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm not.

Atm they are kept by the pool to pay for expenses + some reward for Luke and/or whizkid.

Hi,

I'm new to Eligius. It just seems to make so much sense .

Just curious - what happens to the transaction fees in this pool?

It happens.  I'll catch it up soon manually, no worries.

-wk

Why would the minimum difficulty make a difference ?

Seems to be 125 in payout queue? Only been mining here for a week or 2 but only ever seen it up to 50.
Is this normal?

Thanks

And my brief venture into the world of Eligius comes to an abrupt end.  Thanks for the warning, at least.

I may adopt an approach that keeps the PPS value of the lowest difficulty work from the pool above say 20 satoshi.

This would put us at diff 2 (powers of two) right now I believe.

-wk

Astonishingly the PPS value of a difficulty 1 share is still above 1 bitcoin base unit.  I had previously tried to suggest that wizkid make the minimum at least 1 base unit PPS only to be surprised that it still was...