Keep litecoin. There are many times when the whole alt coin market just
goes to crap and mining litecoin IS the most profitable coin. Switchercoin
mines alts and litecoin (and pays out in litecoin), and I have seen them
mining litecoin on occasion when everything else is going down the tubes.
Topic: [POOL][Scrypt][Scrypt-N][X11] Profit switching pool - wafflepool.com - page 276. (Read 465769 times)
February 06, 2014, 08:07:09 PM
February 06, 2014, 07:47:30 PM
Maybe it's that I'm on the same network as the server...
That would definitely help, heh. My rejects all seem to be because of vardiff switches, and rare cases of 2 blocks found within seconds of each other.I just dropped intensity a bit and am seem to be getting less rejects now. But it's weird, because wafflepool used to give me under 0.5% reject rate with these same settings. Slight config changes I suspect, making lower intensity a better bet.
February 06, 2014, 06:24:29 PM
Also, has anyone had any trouble with the new stratum endpoints? I've added them to the homepage so we can get a few more users moved over to them, but I haven't seen anything yet in this thread about problems 
uswest has been rock stable for me so far. Seeing a higher reject rates then before tho - over 3% right now.Strange, EU is getting me 0,1% only (lower then before).
Maybe it's that I'm on the same network as the server...
February 06, 2014, 05:52:32 PM
Also, has anyone had any trouble with the new stratum endpoints? I've added them to the homepage so we can get a few more users moved over to them, but I haven't seen anything yet in this thread about problems
uswest has been rock stable for me so far. Seeing a higher reject rates then before tho - over 3% right now. February 06, 2014, 05:15:12 PM
Hope to see the actual balances on my page before sleeping (have 1 hour left - It's late in Amsterdam).
EU pool is good, and no problems! Let's set Vardiff's 
.
Hope the 3 updates you posted before, are implemented in the coming day!
Have to say again: Love the pool, great job!
Greets,
Daltonganger
EU pool is good, and no problems
! Let's set Vardiff's .Hope the 3 updates you posted before, are implemented in the coming day
!Have to say again: Love the pool, great job!
Greets,
Daltonganger
February 06, 2014, 05:07:28 PM
On a positive sidenote, I'm pretty confident that the earnings table for BTC/day/MHs is still correct (or at least _extremely_ close) and won't change by more than a few percent when the alpha/casino thing is cleaned up.
Also, has anyone had any trouble with the new stratum endpoints? I've added them to the homepage so we can get a few more users moved over to them, but I haven't seen anything yet in this thread about problems
Also, has anyone had any trouble with the new stratum endpoints? I've added them to the homepage so we can get a few more users moved over to them, but I haven't seen anything yet in this thread about problems
February 06, 2014, 04:36:11 PM
Theres something odd with our block processor (might have started sometime last night). Working on fixing it now, but looks to be something odd with processing casinocoin (keeps processing the same block over and over).
I presume that means the casinocoin balances are higher then actually? Not quite clear what direction this means the balances are going to go for the day. It did seem a bit crazy when I saw almost .1BTC in unexchanged casinocoins on my account, but I thought we might just be having a good day.Yep, that means casinocoin (99% of it), and alphacoin (1%). I've got a warning up on the top of the site, and am working on a script to reprocess those blocks and clear out and incorrect earnings.
For some reason, a hash was inserted incorrectly, and caused a casinocoin block to go back and forth between orphan --> confirmed --> orphan --> confirmed --> repeat. This was caused by a loop in lookups essentially. Since orphaned transactions don't have associated block hashes, we check our successful shares table to find the hash (for our presentation layer). For some reason two coinbase transactions got reverse hashes. So hash1 --> txn2, and hash2 --> txn1. One was orphaned, one was valid, and they kept swapping their status in the db. I've added safeguards to prevent this from happening (stops processing that block and alerts for now, so I can see if it ever happens again)
It should be pretty straightforward to go through the earnings log and reprocess that block out, just takes a bit to write the script. Definitely will be done before payouts though!
February 06, 2014, 04:26:34 PM
Theres something odd with our block processor (might have started sometime last night). Working on fixing it now, but looks to be something odd with processing casinocoin (keeps processing the same block over and over).
I presume that means the casinocoin balances are higher then actually? Not quite clear what direction this means the balances are going to go for the day. It did seem a bit crazy when I saw almost .1BTC in unexchanged casinocoins on my account, but I thought we might just be having a good day. February 06, 2014, 04:11:07 PM
I think your math is wrong somewhere. According to my calcs, mining litecoin directly nets you 0.0074 BTC/day? And thats at nearly triple the variance of dogecoin... Did I miss something?
You are correct, litecoin is SHIT compared to alot of other coins. Its just litecoin fanboys that try to get your hashing power over.
Is it possible to convert the majority of coins before payout? I missed todays pay out limit 0.01 with 0.0005
February 06, 2014, 04:10:29 PM
litecoin difficulty went up between my post and yours. wafflepool profitability also went up.
Did you read my stuff about how you are calculating bitcoin/mhash? I think it might underestimate when the hashrate is going up and overestimate when it is declining
Did you read my stuff about how you are calculating bitcoin/mhash? I think it might underestimate when the hashrate is going up and overestimate when it is declining
Didn't see the LTC difficulty change
As for the overestimate/under, I think its the other way around. Its actual btc / average hashrate, btc should be correct (actual amount), but if the hashrate at this instant is higher than the average over 24 hours (growing pool), the btc/hashrate would be high (divisor is a bit lower than actual hashrate) = overestimated value.
The issue is, there isn't a great way to display this as far as I can tell (I'm open to suggestions). Doing it with current hashrate gets stupid skewed when the hashrate jumps around (+-10% every few minutes), and when the pool has an issue (hopefully not again), but if the hashrate drops 30%, the btc/day jumps by 30%. Average over 24 hours seems like a long enough time to smooth it out, and a short enough time to still be relevant.
February 06, 2014, 03:54:38 PM
litecoin difficulty went up between my post and yours. wafflepool profitability also went up.
Did you read my stuff about how you are calculating bitcoin/mhash? I think it might underestimate when the hashrate is going up and overestimate when it is declining
Did you read my stuff about how you are calculating bitcoin/mhash? I think it might underestimate when the hashrate is going up and overestimate when it is declining
February 06, 2014, 03:27:57 PM
The BTC per mhash is lower than if we mined litecoin directly! Looks like a real orphan problem (maybe somethign else too?. Instead of removing coins like fastcoin, just adjust for orphans
I think your math is wrong somewhere. According to my calcs, mining litecoin directly nets you 0.0074 BTC/day? And thats at nearly triple the variance of dogecoin... Did I miss something?Like the idea of removing worthless coins.
Can you do something about the big exchange problem at the moment?
More then 85% is unexchanged.
Can you do something about the big exchange problem at the moment?
More then 85% is unexchanged.
Theres something odd with our block processor (might have started sometime last night). Working on fixing it now, but looks to be something odd with processing casinocoin (keeps processing the same block over and over).
February 06, 2014, 01:50:00 PM
Absolutely right, didn't think of that. But (newbie question alert), isn't true that whenever the total pool's rejectionrate is lower (and acceptrate higher) we as a pool have more chance of finding blocks because less hashpower is wasted?
Nope. Some hashpower is still be wasted on mining old blocks - you're just getting share credit for them.
It's true. We take a chance to orphan someone else's block that other pools don't take. If it works, extra profit
Yes and no. Every pool has this chance, presuming they submit blocks to the network even if they are 1 behind the main chain. Doesn't matter if you get credited for shares 1 up the chain or not. For us to have a solid chance to orphan someone else's block as the second submitter, we would have to only build on our own chain (which I presume we don't), and that is provably only beneficial with 30%+ of the network hash rate. (Read about selfish mining)Re: Removing coins I would keep LTC only because it is a good baseline, stable block chain that will always be there. I would argue that a scrypt switching pool should always guarantee to do no worse than LTC by at least including LTC as an option.
The others I see no issue with removing them.
The others I see no issue with removing them.
I would say having LTC on the profitability chart is good... but since difficulty changes so rarely, maybe pull the daemon and don't have it in the switching rotation. LTC is probably one of the heavier daemons too, since the spend volume high, so a good one to pull.
February 06, 2014, 01:45:43 PM
Re: Removing coins I would keep LTC only because it is a good baseline, stable block chain that will always be there. I would argue that a scrypt switching pool should always guarantee to do no worse than LTC by at least including LTC as an option.
The others I see no issue with removing them.
The others I see no issue with removing them.
February 06, 2014, 01:43:43 PM
Still the rejectrate is kinda sick low. I've got one GPU that has 2045160 accepted shares and 1920 rejected. That's less than 0,1%... (connected to main server wafflepool.com and living near Amsterdam).
Keep in mind, this is the same for everyone, so your profit won't likely be higher as a result of lower rejects.
Absolutely right, didn't think of that. But (newbie question alert), isn't true that whenever the total pool's rejectionrate is lower (and acceptrate higher) we as a pool have more chance of finding blocks because less hashpower is wasted?
It's true. We take a chance to orphan someone else's block that other pools don't take. If it works, extra profit
February 06, 2014, 01:41:22 PM
testing EU server have 10 % more hash then on middle coin, very low reject rate
February 06, 2014, 01:40:59 PM
Still the rejectrate is kinda sick low. I've got one GPU that has 2045160 accepted shares and 1920 rejected. That's less than 0,1%... (connected to main server wafflepool.com and living near Amsterdam).
Keep in mind, this is the same for everyone, so your profit won't likely be higher as a result of lower rejects.
Absolutely right, didn't think of that. But (newbie question alert), isn't true that whenever the total pool's rejectionrate is lower (and acceptrate higher) we as a pool have more chance of finding blocks because less hashpower is wasted?
February 06, 2014, 01:27:13 PM
Still the rejectrate is kinda sick low. I've got one GPU that has 2045160 accepted shares and 1920 rejected. That's less than 0,1%... (connected to main server wafflepool.com and living near Amsterdam).
Keep in mind, this is the same for everyone, so your profit won't likely be higher as a result of lower rejects. Wafflepool accepts shares that are 1 block old (just not two blocks old). This is unlike middlecoin, that stops accepts shares for the previous block as soon as a new block is found. This means everyone has the same advantage of lower shares on wafflepool.
All this said, I like wafflepool's stale strategy a lot more, as it seems to decrease variance and makes rejects more meaningful.
February 06, 2014, 01:23:03 PM
Still the rejectrate is kinda sick low. I've got one GPU that has 2045160 accepted shares and 1920 rejected. That's less than 0,1%... (connected to main server wafflepool.com and living near Amsterdam). Also nice to see hashrate is climbing. Glad I switched over from middlecoin
I'm also behind moving some coins from the list. It probably wouldn't hurt earnings, but it will definately make it more managable in serverload terms. Rather add some new profitable coins then keep existing that almost aren't mined at all. I'm personally not bothered by leftovers added to the pool's funding to make it even more awesome
I'm also behind moving some coins from the list. It probably wouldn't hurt earnings, but it will definately make it more managable in serverload terms. Rather add some new profitable coins then keep existing that almost aren't mined at all. I'm personally not bothered by leftovers added to the pool's funding to make it even more awesome
February 06, 2014, 01:20:22 PM
Coin removals:
Unless there is any major opposition, those leftover amounts would be left in the exchange account for if we start mining that coin again (at which point they'll go right back into normal exchange cycles). If we don't ever end up mining that coin again, either they'll be considered a donation to the pool, or we'll have a vote here to decide what to do with them.
Thoughts?
Unless there is any major opposition, those leftover amounts would be left in the exchange account for if we start mining that coin again (at which point they'll go right back into normal exchange cycles). If we don't ever end up mining that coin again, either they'll be considered a donation to the pool, or we'll have a vote here to decide what to do with them.
Thoughts?
Just keep the fractions of coins for dropped chains. They equate to barely anything when you divide them up anyway. I'm okay with you considering it a donation for your efforts.
No idea why I lost shares for an hour last night eh? Was weird, but at least I noticed it so not much income lost.
---
Maybe it is just being calculated incorrectly? You should give users personal BTC/mhash based on BTC paid divided by sum of submitted share difficulty.
Edit: in particular i think you might be calculating it by past 24 hours bitcoins divided by current hashrate when you need to sum it all instead of using current hashrate
Edit: in particular i think you might be calculating it by past 24 hours bitcoins divided by current hashrate when you need to sum it all instead of using current hashrate
So far, BTC/MH seems to be consistently a bit higher then reported on the main page. That said, the orphan rate being reported was bugged - poolwaffle noted this a few posts above you.
Jump to: