Pages:
Author

Topic: Weekly pool and network statistics - page 12. (Read 91252 times)

hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 501
January 12, 2014, 10:02:18 PM
I'm not sure why, but i always look forward to these posts. Cheesy
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
January 12, 2014, 09:29:43 PM
2 weeks with no updates!?!  I'm having withdrawals  Shocked

Just running late, DrG - I'll post later on today.
DrG
legendary
Activity: 2086
Merit: 1035
January 12, 2014, 07:22:13 PM
2 weeks with no updates!?!  I'm having withdrawals  Shocked
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
January 02, 2014, 03:21:09 AM

NOTE: There will be no Weekly Pool and Network Statistics this week, as I'm going to having a communications-free week. Instead, I've written a short post commemorating one of the strangest and most fun pools of the last couple of years.

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2014/01/17-goodbye-hhtt-coinbase-will-never-be.html

HHTT's coinbase messages: http://bitbin.it/VOXWstm9

Have a good weekend!
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 29, 2013, 08:09:23 AM


29thDecember 2013 weekly pool and network statistics


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.


Changelog:

    Prettified the pie chart a bit more.

Usual pools missing from results:

    50BTC.com, Bitparking, Deepbit, GIVE-ME-COINS.com, Triplemining: No blocks solved this week.

Errors:

    Nil.

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter: "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild: "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625 "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

1. The network's weekly average hashrate hits 10 Phps.

Well, somewhere between 9.4 and 10.5 Phps anyway. Although the block solve rate was reduced to 1185 blocks this week, I imagine that will pick up again after the Christmas / New Years holidays are over and deliveries continue as usual.

2. Discus Fish continues to grab more of the network

Discus Fish, a Chinese pool,  has increased it's share of the network continuously for the last six weeks, and has increased by more than 600% over the last nine weeks. Don't Chinese miners mine anywhere else? Or does the pool have something that others don't? If Discus Fish does have some quality that makes it attractive to miners and they start courting English speaking miners, GHash.IO could be in trouble. In any case, it's nice to see a small pool move up to the top 5 in such an explosive fashion.

Another nice thing that Disus Fish does is immortalise it's miners - if you're lucky enough to solve a block for them, they add your name to their coinbase signature, for example in block height 277468:

"\003\xdc;\004七彩神仙鱼\xe2\xf7\a\032.N%\006\x96\xcf|o\x9b\xb65\031[-\xaa)\xe3\xc8&\xc7\xf7\xe7+\xf6\003\\\020\004X\xe7Ɩ\b\n|Mined by user yangzhiqing"

3. Pierce and Paul

Pierce and Paul are only known by their/its coinbase signature, for example this one from block height 276311:

"\003W7\004YQ\x84\x9a4]\xeeu\xfd'eN\xe3\xdd\xf6\t\xff\xbc\xf83"\025\016\xd0(N\xa4\xfb\xba%\x90G\004Й\xb3\005\001\xd5For Pierce and Paul"

I have been assuming it's a private hashing entity rather than a private pool since the hashrate has remained steady (and the proportion of the network slowly decreasing) since they started signing the coinbase. This week sees a very large increase in the hashrate for them, so either a bunch of new ASIC hashers have been purchased by them, or they've become a private pool.

4. Happy new year everyone!

That is all.


As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2013/12/december-29th-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search/label/weeklypoolstatistics and other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.






donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2013, 08:07:31 AM
22nd December 2013 weekly pool and network statistics


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.


Changelog:

    Change in the method used to estimate BTCGuild's luck (see below).

Usual pools missing from results:

    50BTC.com, Ozcoin, Triplemining, Deepbit: No blocks solved this week.

Errors:

    Data from Polmine was in error this week as some unixtime dates were set to zero. This affected the table, the pie chart and the pool hashrate per round chart.

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter: "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild: "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625 "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

1. BTCGuild and GHash.IO

I couldn't check last week's data from GHash.IO or BTCGuild as I had a crash while I was still investigating, and I haven't yet implemented scripts to automatically save data - just the data summary. However there were many outages for GHash.IO last week which may have caused the average weekly hashrate to be reduced.

Today I did some bug checking on the script estimating BTCGuild's luck (difficulty 1 shares / network difficulty). Unfortunately, each check take about an hour and a half (I have poor internet connectivity here), so as a stop-gap solution the script now estimates BTCGuild's luck as the inverse of the average shown on BTCGuild's luck estimate chart. This is not optimal since I'm using pre-digested data, so I hope to fix this at some point when I have time.

2. Polmine

Polmine's data this week had all but the last three unixtime block solve dates as zero. The effect of this was to cause a hashrate error which I only noticed this after I'd finished running all the scripts, and I didn't have time to recalculate everything. The number of blocks by Polmine solved is correct.

The error in turn affected the Polmine data in the table, all the data in the second pie chart (which is why it's blank), and all the data in the hashrate per round chart. The latter was too damaged to use, so it is not included this week.

3. Ozcoin

Ozcoin did not solve a block this week. This is a great pool, run by an operator for whom I have much respect. If you feel the need to help increase the hashrates of smaller pools, this would be a good place to start.


As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2013/12/december-15th-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search/label/weeklypoolstatistics and other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.




donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 15, 2013, 06:39:46 AM
Hi organofcorti,
  If I had to guess...your ghash.io average speed is wrong.  They were ahead of BTC Guild up until the end of this week based on my interim checks.  Then again, the luck *seems* off (I don't think pool luck has been 104% this last week, it wasn't good for the first half of the week at least).  I'll take a look on my end to see if I can find what my calculated luck % was for the week.

Thanks eleuthria - let me know what you find.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
December 15, 2013, 04:58:48 AM
Hi organofcorti,
  If I had to guess...your ghash.io average speed is wrong.  They were ahead of BTC Guild up until the end of this week based on my interim checks.  Then again, the luck *seems* off (I don't think pool luck has been 104% this last week, it wasn't good for the first half of the week at least).  I'll take a look on my end to see if I can find what my calculated luck % was for the week.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 15, 2013, 03:30:13 AM

15th December 2013 weekly pool and network statistics


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.


Changelog:

    Nil

Usual pools missing from results:

    BTCDig, Triplemining, Deepbit: No blocks solved this week.

Errors:

    The hashrate (or possibly luck, or both) estimates for either BTCGuild or  GHashIO are  incorrect. I'm not sure which.

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter: "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild: "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625 "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

1. BTCGuild and GHash.IO

You might notice that although BTCGuild's hashrate is higher than GHash.IO's hashrate, it solved fewer blocks. This would indicate a worse luck for BTCGuild than for GHash.IO, and yet the results show the reverse.

I'm not sure which of the results are in error - my BTCGuild script is complicated and the script for GHash.IO is new. I'll be spending tonight trying to figure out what the problem is.


As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2013/12/december-15th-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search/label/weeklypoolstatistics and other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.






donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 08, 2013, 04:56:32 AM
8th December 2013 weekly pool and network statistics


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.

Changelog:

    Nil

Usual pools missing from results:

    50BTC.com, Triplemining, Deepbit: No blocks solved this week.
    BTCMine,  Giga's pool: Both closed.

Errors:

    Nil

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter:  "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild :  "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and  "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625  "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

Welcome, miners!

1. BTCGuild and GHash.IO

GHash.IO overtook BTCGuild this week - the now have a quarter of a percent more of the network than BTCGuild.

Last week I wrote:

    "GHash.IO keep increasing their share of the network, most likely due to CEX.IO trading. I'm not sure how I feel about this - it's an increase in the proportion controlled by a single entity, but in effect any pool has the same control of hashes. It should make no difference that (as far as I'm aware) CEX.IO maintains the hash sources locally rather than the sources being distributed. Is there a downside I'm not understanding?"

I received a couple of good responses on bitcointalk.org:

From eleuthria, BTCGuild pool op:

    "Only extra worry from cex.io/ghash.io that is different from past concerns is accountability.  If a public pool *attempted* to do something nefarious that pool just committed suicide whether they succeed or fail at the gamble.  When a pool that has ~1 PH/s (based on estimates looking at their speed fluctuations during known pool issues for public vs private) privately owned, there is no accountability left.  Pair that with using a 0% fee for what was already the 2nd largest mining entity before the public was allowed in.  If they attempt something, there is basically no downside.  If the public hashrate leaves due to an attempt, they aren't actually losing anything (no fee) other than the mining time on their private farm."

From gmaxwell, bitcoin developer:

    "The excuse giving for years of why consolidations of ten percent, twenty percent, or even more, in the hands of pool operators didn't effectively disprove the Bitcoin security model was that pool operators were more obligated than a typical miner to behave with the public interest at heart because the hashrate controlling miners could vote with their feet.

    I've never been too fond of the argument: evidence (e.g. miners voting with their feet very slowly even when a pool is clearly robbing them) suggests otherwise... But that argument doesn't even exist for GHash.io/CEX.io: the miners are captive and cannot leave. Worse, there is a moral hazard because an unknown portion of the hardware is paid for by other people (at top dollar rates too) and so if some stunt they perform debases its value... so what? Heck, perhaps it drops the market value down to nothing an cex can buy their obligations back for a song. This means that CEX.io can probably profit from an attack even if that attack ultimately fails."

Thanks for explaining that, guys. I feel a little foolish for not having taken market forces into account.

2. "Unknown" at 10% of the network

I've developed my scripts to cast a wide a net as possible when identifying block owners, even so there are 137 blocks unaccounted for by the usual sources. I wonder if there are a bunch of new solominers? The network solved over 1300 blocks this week, so there are certainly new hash sources being added.

3. In memoriam

(Last "in memoriam" post)

I was once again busy all week on a project unrelated to mining and missed the planned closure of GigaVPS and Liquidbits' Mineb.tc pool (referred to as "Giga's pool" in the weekly stats). I'm sad to see the pool go, it was a good pool, stable and with great stats. I wish Giga VPS and LiquidBits the best in whatever project to which they next turn their attention. for those readers interested,  I posted an audit of the the pool's "luck" in August

It also looks like dbitcoin and company have finally moved the remaining hashes from BTCMine to BTCDig. I'm glad to see a famous old mine continuing under a new guise.

Bitclockers.com has been down for so long now that I'm also considering that pool closed.

So here's an update of the "In memoriam" chart of the percentage of hashrates of all the dead pools for which I have records, in order of the last week in which they solved a block.

As I wrote last time:

    "Please take some time to think about the pool operators who ran these pools, loved them as if they were their own children, and did their part to help secure the network. Also, don't forget about the many other pools that didn't make it -  Arsbitcoin and Continuum pool (the first pool to use the Geometric method of reward distribution, the progenitor of DGM) come to mind, but there have been many others, especially those that were unable to change from a proportional reward method."


As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2013/12/december-8th-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search/label/weeklypoolstatisticsand other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.







staff
Activity: 4172
Merit: 8419
December 02, 2013, 01:36:18 PM
It should make no difference that (as far as I'm aware) CEX.IO maintains the hash sources locally rather than the sources being distributed. Is there a downside I'm not understanding?
The excuse giving for years of why consolidations of ten percent, twenty percent, or even more, in the hands of pool operators didn't effectively disprove the Bitcoin security model was that pool operators were more obligated than a typical miner to behave with the public interest at heart because the hashrate controlling miners could vote with their feet.

I've never been too fond of the argument: evidence (e.g. miners voting with their feet very slowly even when a pool is clearly robbing them) suggests otherwise... But that argument doesn't even exist for GHash.io/CEX.io: the miners are captive and cannot leave. Worse, there is a moral hazard because an unknown portion of the hardware is paid for by other people (at top dollar rates too) and so if some stunt they perform debases its value... so what? Heck, perhaps it drops the market value down to nothing an cex can buy their obligations back for a song. This means that CEX.io can probably profit from an attack even if that attack ultimately fails.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
December 02, 2013, 01:06:30 PM
GHash.IO keep increasing their share of the network, most likely due to CEX.IO trading. I'm not sure how I feel about this - it's an increase in the proportion controlled by a single entity, but in effect any pool has the same control of hashes. It should make no difference that (as far as I'm aware) CEX.IO maintains the hash sources locally rather than the sources being distributed. Is there a downside I'm not understanding?

Only extra worry from cex.io/ghash.io that is different from past concerns is accountability.  If a public pool *attempted* to do something nefarious that pool just committed suicide whether they succeed or fail at the gamble.  When a pool that has ~1 PH/s (based on estimates looking at their speed fluctuations during known pool issues for public vs private) privately owned, there is no accountability left.  Pair that with using a 0% fee for what was already the 2nd largest mining entity before the public was allowed in.  If they attempt something, there is basically no downside.  If the public hashrate leaves due to an attempt, they aren't actually losing anything (no fee) other than the mining time on their private farm.
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
December 02, 2013, 08:01:01 AM


Seems like the best ever week for btcguild with a CDF of 0.01.
As always, thanks for the report Smiley
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 01, 2013, 08:07:42 AM

1st December 2013 weekly pool and network statistics


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.


Changelog:

    Nil

Usual pools missing from results:

    50BTC.com, BTCMine, Triplemining: No blocks solved this week.

Errors:

    Nil

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter:  "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild :  "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", plus a new signature, "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and  "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625  "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

1. BTCGuild and GHash.IO

GHash.IO keep increasing their share of the network, most likely due to CEX.IO trading. I'm not sure how I feel about this - it's an increase in the proportion controlled by a single entity, but in effect any pool has the same control of hashes. It should make no difference that (as far as I'm aware) CEX.IO maintains the hash sources locally rather than the sources being distributed. Is there a downside I'm not understanding?

2. The network hashrate has increased 20629 % in the last 12 months

I was looking over a few old posts and found this one from a year ago.50BTC.com was top dog, BTCGuild and Deepbit shared second place. Now it's BTCGuild and GHash.IO (which didn't even exist then) and Deepbit and 50BTC.com are at ~ 1Thps each. Fortunes change rapidly in bitcoinworld.

A side note - the network hashrate just passed the half a petahash mark.

3. My apologies for not returning emails over the past week or two.

I'm stuck on a very interesting problem which has lead me down a rabbit hole, and as a result I've been putting of responding to emails. I hope to get on to that shortly.

Anyway, I must go. The rabbit hole awaits ....



As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2013/12/december-1st-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search?q=weeklypoolstatistics and other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.






donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
November 24, 2013, 04:50:54 AM
24th November 2013 weekly pool and network statistics.


Other weekly pool and network statistics posts

Welcome, miners.


Changelog:

    Nil

Usual pools missing from results:

    Deepbit - no blocks solved this week.
    BTCDig - no blocks solved this week.
    BTCMine - no blocks solved this week.

Errors:

    Nil

Pools with coinbase signature:

    ASICMiner: "Mined By ASICMiner"
    Alydian5335: "Alydian5335"
    Bitparking: "bitparking"
    BitMinter:  "BitMinter"
    BTCGuild :  "Mined by BTC Guild", "BTC Guild DE", "BTC Guild 2", "BTC Guild US2", plus a new signature, "BTC Guild GW"
    CoinLab: "CoinLab"
    Discus Fish: "七彩神仙鱼" and "Made in China"
    EclipseMC: "EMC"
    Eligius: "Eligius"
    50BTC.com: "Hi from 50BTC.com" and  "50BTC.com"
    GHash.IO: "ghash.io" (not current)
    GIVE-ME-COINS.com: "Mined at GIVE-ME-COINS.com"
    HHTT: "HHTT"
    Megabigpower "megabigpower.com"
    175btc.com": "Mined By 175btc.com"
    Ozcoin: "ozcoin"
    Pierce and Paul: "For Pierce and Paul"
    Triplemining: "Triplemining.com"
    Slush's pool: "slush"

Recent coinbase messages:

    258692 "To my honey, by bitfish."
    259575 259622 259625  "EMC: Organofcorti lives!"
    263952 "btcpoolman"

Pool hopping:

    Nil.

1. EclipseMC has normal luck and normal hashrates per round.

After Inaba made a few changes to his APIs, the data seems much more normal - both luck and hashrates are similar to other pools.

2. Historical network proportions.

Last week I suggested mining at smaller pools. This week I posted a historical chart of network proportions which some of you might find interesting - some current small pools were much larger, and some current large pools started out with very small proportions of the network.

3. 50BTC still hanging in there ....

Not much news in the 50BTC thread on the bitcointalk.org forum.

I wonder who is providing their hashes? Maybe from the pool owners?


As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.
You can view this weeks charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/november-24th-2013-weekly-pool-and.html

You can view all previous charts at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com.au/search?q=weeklypoolstatistics and other posts and fun things at http://organofcorti.blogspot.com. Follow me on Twitter @oocBlog for notification of new posts as soon as I publish.






donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
November 24, 2013, 03:16:44 AM
Hi there,

Will it be possible to add a column on these nice reports with the Number of Blocks Solved per Thps weekly on each pool. This could give an additional measure on how the pool did during the week and how lucky it was as compared to others.

The "Mean shares per round/Difficulty" does that, "that" being how lucky it was compared to other pools.

Of course I guess I had a THs of power I wouldn't mind a measure of how well/bad I did in comparison without using my calculator.

Yes, I think it will be quite useful to have that column (may be per 100GHs instead of 1THs) so that readers have that measure handy in addition to the Mean shares per round.

Interesting, but why would this be a better or more useful measure of luck than the canonical one? If I squeeze another column in there, I want to be certain theres a need for it.

Blocks per Thps will change when difficulty changes, so it's not very handy to look at over time. You'd need to multiply by difficulty. If you also by 2^32 you get estimated number of hashes to create those blocks. Divide by Thps, and you get a measurement with units sec^-1. Multiply by total seconds in a week and you get the inverse of the standard luck measurement: hashes / (difficulty * blocks * 2^32).

I appreciate the idea, but I just don't think theres a need for another closely related luck measurement - CDF and the usual one will do.
ok
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
November 23, 2013, 01:56:55 PM
Hi there,

Will it be possible to add a column on these nice reports with the Number of Blocks Solved per Thps weekly on each pool. This could give an additional measure on how the pool did during the week and how lucky it was as compared to others.

The "Mean shares per round/Difficulty" does that, "that" being how lucky it was compared to other pools.

Of course I guess I had a THs of power I wouldn't mind a measure of how well/bad I did in comparison without using my calculator.

Yes, I think it will be quite useful to have that column (may be per 100GHs instead of 1THs) so that readers have that measure handy in addition to the Mean shares per round.
legendary
Activity: 3578
Merit: 1090
Think for yourself
November 23, 2013, 01:47:12 PM
Hi there,

Will it be possible to add a column on these nice reports with the Number of Blocks Solved per Thps weekly on each pool. This could give an additional measure on how the pool did during the week and how lucky it was as compared to others.

The "Mean shares per round/Difficulty" does that, "that" being how lucky it was compared to other pools.

Of course I guess I had a THs of power I wouldn't mind a measure of how well/bad I did in comparison without using my calculator.
ok
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
November 23, 2013, 01:31:13 PM
Hi there,

Will it be possible to add a column on these nice reports with the Number of Blocks Solved per Thps weekly on each pool. This could give an additional measure on how the pool did during the week and how lucky it was as compared to others.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
November 18, 2013, 04:12:54 AM
I think I found one other place that is not showing the shares properly and it might affect the share count for a round... I need to investigate it further, but it's kinda late here.  I will get to it ASAP.  The share count should definitely be more accurate but I'm not sure it's 100% accurate without further investigation.

Great! Looking back at previous posts, I think the "crazy good luck" started to occur the week previous to the October 27th post (or maybe the week before the October 20th post). The hashrate spikes began in the last week or two of September. I hope that helps in some way.

The way I have PPS, Anonymous PPS and DGM shares in the tables makes collating all those shares properly somewhat difficult, as they all reside in different tables in the database, which makes paying the shares much easier.  If it had it to do over, I'd have designed it very differently, but with all projects that kind of grow as time goes along, it's kind of convoluted now.

I know what you mean - you can't really plan for something you don't know will happen. I have the same problem (on a much smaller scale) with the scripts I run to generate the weekly reports. Part of them are jungles of code and well overdue for a rewrite Wink

The pool originally started as Prop, then switched to GM, then to DGM, then added PPS, then added Anonymous PPS... ugh.


Yeah, remember who initially recommended you change to GM, way back when? Wink

Pages:
Jump to: