Topic: [POOL][Scrypt][Scrypt-N][X11] Profit switching pool - wafflepool.com - page 101. (Read 465668 times)

Even though we are a big pool, we are still very much affected by luck.  And it shows even more because of how information is displayed.  Our average block time for LTC is around an hour.  Which means we can go (pretty regularly) a few hours without finding a block.  And that is if we mined LTC the whole time, but we don't.  So instead of "bad luck" being 3 hours of 0 income, its 6 hours (assuming 50/50 mining on another coin/ltc).  During that time, profit is constantly dropping, and sometimes we end a day without recouping that bad luck.  

Just something that happens.  Does it suck?  Sure.  But every pool will have those days.  Our "vs LTC %" is assuming perfect conditions.  It assumes you can mine at 100% efficiency (no rejects), propagate 100% efficiently (no orphans), with a 0% fee, and at 100% luck (no good/bad days).  You could very easily have an 80% LTC day on a LTC pool.


Edit: I also just realized our "vs LTC" includes the 2% fee we charge.  It is based on what is actually earned by user accounts (and thus affected by our fee).  I don't know which I feel is better for that column, and I'd like some input if possible.  Essentially if we had a perfect (see conditions above) of mining only LTC, we would show 98% of LTC in that column (100% - 2% fee).  Showing it with the fee included is more accurate, where "this is what you actually get", then again, if people are factoring the 2% into the calculation afterwards (since it isn't mentioned), it looks worse than it actually is.

Input?

pw, I am grateful for your work! simply associating information. Morning too did the FTC and was also lower than 100%. Apparently I made the wrong conclusion.

I'm still not sure what you mean exactly.  The reason we had a bad day on Apr 04 was purely luck.  We did mine some FTC that day, but we also mined LTC for about 60% of the day, and found less about 70% of the blocks we should have (bad luck).

I noticed that in the days when bad "Apr 04, 2014 51.36639942 14.70 GH / s 0.00349549 81%" we've been working on FTC. Thought, who can employees of the powerful order forms extraction FTC.

I don't know what you mean be "have an order for feathercoin"?  We only mine FTC when it is profitable, the exact same as every coin we mine, and the whole entire purpose of the pool...

pw, have an order for feathercoin? We periodically make it, but because of this largely falls factor "vs LTC".

Thanks for the reply.

I'll follow-up with an email in a bit if/when it happens again. The gridseed devices are not overclocked and I am using a solid 1200W PowerCooler PSU that used to handle several 290s solidly but now is dedicated to a few measly Gridseeds so I don't think the PSU is the issue.

It could be cgminer related since the S/W is still buggy for these things, but it only seems to happen during fast coins which makes me suspect something else is at play. Anyway thanks for the offer to check.

Well, it seems no one else is facing this situation (or simply don't mind), but it is happening again. I first notice on April/08 but today it is happening again and it seems to have started when the confirmed balance reached 0.002. The overall result seems unaffected thus is actually a minor problem, maybe a glitch in the graph, but I felt it worth to mention.
If someone else sees that please feel free to share.

The time window of the graph is 12 hours so you may not see the weird spike followed by a sharp drop in the balance when following the link below.

http://www.wafflepoolmonitor.com/index.php?address=1EXHdeHeLJ1UxPDebC2V9pdwEyHDGC56dX

Yep, sorry about that.  Removed it.

Nevermind. I just read the "Locked Difficulty (Feb 22nd)" section of the News page. It indicates that worker difficulty is locked to 512+.

I'm only at 5.5-ish MH/s, so I'm assuming I don't want to specify a worker difficulty above the base.

It might make sense to change the example on the main page to not specify a difficulty value, since my guess is most people will want the default.

The example on the main page indicates that you can pass an optional dif value as the password. But one of the features listed in this announcement thread is automatic difficulty adjustment.

So is the example obsolete and there is no need to specify difficulty via the password? If not, and specifying difficulty is recommended, is there a guideline for the dif value per MH/s?

Thanks in advance.

I've had a few other gridseed users mention this to me in emails and we've never been able to track it down.  Some users reported that un-overclocking theirs fixed it (not sure if yours is overclocked or not).  Others mentioned getting a strong PSU helped (not sure if that was an isolated instance).  I've only seen a few people mention it.  Please email me if you want to try to track it down...

Is anyone else having difficultly with gridseed devices dropping hashrate on wafflepool periodically?

I have a few gridseeds that hash stably, however on "faster coins" the hashrate reported by wafflepool drops ~80-90%. During this time there are very few stale shares or rejects and cgminer shows hashing as operating fine, and the connection to the pool is fine. Instead the number of accepted shares suddenly drops to lower number compared to what I'd expect for the hashrate. Then when wafflepool switches to a slower coin, all of a sudden the hashrate jumps back up to what it should be.

I am wondering if the gridseed devices are losing work by being interrupted with new work before finishing a previous batch on these fast coins. Or maybe something else? If so any solutions?

Has anyone else seen this behavior before? I like mining on wafflepool, but recently about 50% of the time my hashrate is crashing...

Here is an example, these are my shares for the past 10 shifts. Under normal operation I find ~30,000 shares per shift, but on some shifts accepted shares drop to 3,000-8,000 per shift, which is a large drop. During this time wafflepool will report a lower estimated hashrate, but cgminer says everything is fine. Then there is a coin shift and all of a sudden my accepted shares jump back up and wafflepool estimates my full hashrate again.

Shares (yours / total)   Blocks Found
29,184 / 202615296   4
33,792 / 200934912   1
17,408 / 201347072   7
3,584 / 201063424   3
7,168 / 201006080   2
10,752 / 201811456   8
6,656 / 200230400   5
8,704 / 201930240   12
5,120 / 201117696   5

Hi,
Introducing the free(ads supported)  version of Wafflepool Monitor android app.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.watcron.ads.wafflepoolmonitor

It has all the features as below:
Low downloads and fast refresh.
Hashrate as Worker as well Graphs supported.
Alerts supported.
Auto refresh supported.
Multi address supported.
Multi workers supported.
Widgets supported.
Notifications supported.
Easy way to enter your address through QR code.
All times converted to the user time zone.
User as well as pool statistics.
Support for balance display in mBTC or BTC.
Support for following currencies:
"USD", CNY","JPY","SGD","HKD","CAD","AUD","NZD","GBP","DKK","SEK","BRL","CHF","EUR","RUB","SLL","PLN", "THB"
QR code supported to enter address.


   

Donations: 1MrEdZWv5HqE7kJf2jAnYLF9LYGBDM11Zv

IMP: In case you do not want ads please try https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.watcron.wafflepoolmonitor which requires payment of .003 BTC.

Hello everyone,

I'm wondering if somebody else is getting a weird graphic in "wafflepoolmonitor".
The "Hashrate and Balances" graph shows a sudden raise (confirmed instantly jumped from 0.002 to 0.015 ) then stabilizes for about 1:30h followed by a sharp drop (instantly dropping from 0.016 to 0.0079 without any amount being sent to my wallet ) and follows normally from that point onwards.
Have anyone experienced something similar?  

Thanks for explaining poolwaffle. Now I don't have to worry...

This is well within reason.  When you mine smaller coins, you'll see a higher reject rate (5-8% normally), and when mining larger coins you'll see a low reject rate (0-1%), it will average out to around 3% and is completely normal, and evenly distributed across the pool.

jedimstr, pool is reporting 3%-6% stale rate, not the miner....

Yeah I wouldn't worry about that amount.  And worry more about what the pool reports than what your mining software is reporting.

Thanks for your reply. Edited my config. file and removed this parameter from it.

P.S. Btw, so now I can expect a 3%-6% stale rate without worrying about it?