Topic: Why do you mine on deepbit? - page 6. (Read 18342 times)

What do you do for $250/hr?

Thanks Randy.  Actually, for the work I do my charge rate is 250.

I should have also observed that keeping computers running well on something for six months or a year takes more than 15 minutes, I found that in terms of what i spend my time working on, it wasn't a huge overhead.

Making other things work? Are you fucking kidding? So, fifteen minutes to set up an account and point miners at it isn't worth $60? You really value your time at $240/hr? I would bet my life that you have no skill worth that much, save maybe whoring yourself out to fat chicks. Even that is a stretch.

I mine at deepbit - so what.  It works so it saves me pissing around and spending my time making other things work.  My time is worth something.

If I pay 3% on a couple of coins/day for the last six months that I've been mining (on and off) that's 11 whole coins ($50-$60) - I'm unexcited by that as it's trivial.

-_-" Please notice the 8mintue up time... I was testing different miners around that time, With the 'new' cgminer that i had gotten, i had started to test features on it, And start to understand the program itself, Like in the post, I was confused about the effiecency I was also seeing what miner would work the best, And weather or not p2pool would work properly with phoenix (for the sake of a gui)

Man, I admit i wasnt there for a month, I ran it for a week (yeah yeah short window for such a small pool) and had significantly less rewards than deepbit

Funny, I was Half typing what you were while you were typing. Ima just Restate that last part, I couldnt agree more
TL;DR Use pings to choose your BF3 server, use your brain to choose a pool

Oh? I did not know that one could disable the MM half, I assumed all MM pools were "strictly" set as MM (i assumed it was somekind of coding forcing it to behave in a non alterable manner)
Clearly. I have made an idiot out of myself.

Quote "How does that even work out?"
Well. Inaba your correct for asking that question, It does not "work out", I just went "oh hey i used to mine at BTCguild!, ima go back there!"

Now, As to the argument around Latency=Stales, I agree--That the amount is (most of the time) Neglegable in situations <200ms

This network latency argument is laughable.

Lets assume a terribly bad 500ms latency. There is a longpoll on average every 10 minutes (im ignoring merged mining which you seem to despise anyway). So there is a 1/1200th chance your share will be stale because you missed the LP due to network latency. That is 0.08%. Okay maybe more if you run several miners, but somehow you think its worth giving 3% in fees to lower that number?

But its even more nonsensical than that. There is not even a direct relationship between latency and stales. If you mine at a large  pool that has to send 5000 longpolls to its miners and you happen to be the last one served, a 10ms ping isnt gonna do you any good.  It might still take 200+ms before the pool serves you.

The most sensible metric is measured stales. But guess what, unless you are mining PPS, even that is not all telling. An efficient pool will send an LP to the fastest miners first, as that will increase the block creation rate a tiny bit, so you stand to gain from being served later if you have a low hashrate.

TL;DR Use pings to choose your BF3 server, use your brain to choose a pool

If the pool has been around long enough, a statistical analysis will let you know if the op is stealing blocks as well.  Not that I think Tycho would do anything of the sort, but how does your reasoning not apply to Deepbit as well?

how can you steal on a 100% pps pool with no fees? you can even calculate the pps yourself and see if it is correct.
maybe they can set the share difficulty higher than 1, but you can see that as well.

So you have Eclipse at 83ms and Bitclockers at a phenomenal 43ms and your solution is to switch to BTCGuild at 127ms?  How does that even work out?

You can mine at EMC and turn off MM if you dislike it.  I'm not sure what Bitclockers policy is on MM.  But in all honesty, at your latency, it doesn't matter too much to begin with.  So the latency argument for mining on Deepbit is pretty much bunk due to transoceanic connections.  There may be other valid reasons and I'm not discounting them, but latency isn't one of them.  For Flower, though, it may make a slight difference, since he basically lives in the Hetzner datacenter

Some months ago we had US server too, that may explain your first results.

from germany:

EclipseMC (for me longest ping times but still got most hash out of it; for me pool with least possible stales)
ping -c 5 us.eclipsemc.com
PING us.eclipsemc.com (208.110.68.114) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 208.110.68.114: icmp_req=1 ttl=50 time=122 ms
64 bytes from 208.110.68.114: icmp_req=2 ttl=50 time=122 ms
64 bytes from 208.110.68.114: icmp_req=3 ttl=50 time=133 ms
64 bytes from 208.110.68.114: icmp_req=4 ttl=50 time=122 ms
64 bytes from 208.110.68.114: icmp_req=5 ttl=50 time=122 ms

--- us.eclipsemc.com ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 21349ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 122.574/124.811/133.226/4.208 ms

DeepBit (Provider: Hetzner)
ping -c 5 pit.deepbit.net
PING pit.deepbit.net (46.4.121.118) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from static.118.121.4.46.clients.your-server.de (46.4.121.118): icmp_req=1 ttl=55 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from static.118.121.4.46.clients.your-server.de (46.4.121.118): icmp_req=2 ttl=55 time=18.5 ms
64 bytes from static.118.121.4.46.clients.your-server.de (46.4.121.118): icmp_req=3 ttl=55 time=17.1 ms
64 bytes from static.118.121.4.46.clients.your-server.de (46.4.121.118): icmp_req=4 ttl=55 time=17.0 ms
64 bytes from static.118.121.4.46.clients.your-server.de (46.4.121.118): icmp_req=5 ttl=55 time=18.1 ms

--- pit.deepbit.net ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 17.005/17.695/18.540/0.606 ms

Eligius (Provider: Hetzner, i7 sponsored by MtGox for feeless transations)
ping -c 5 mining.eligius.st
PING ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252): icmp_req=1 ttl=55 time=18.4 ms
64 bytes from ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252): icmp_req=2 ttl=55 time=29.5 ms
64 bytes from ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252): icmp_req=3 ttl=55 time=17.9 ms
64 bytes from ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252): icmp_req=4 ttl=55 time=16.5 ms
64 bytes from ra.mining.eligius.st (78.47.187.252): icmp_req=5 ttl=55 time=16.9 ms

--- ra.mining.eligius.st ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4002ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 16.517/19.883/29.549/4.882 ms

P2Pool (my instance; Provider: hetzner)
ping -c 5 pool.k1024.de
PING pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155): icmp_req=1 ttl=55 time=18.3 ms
64 bytes from pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155): icmp_req=2 ttl=55 time=16.8 ms
64 bytes from pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155): icmp_req=3 ttl=55 time=17.7 ms
64 bytes from pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155): icmp_req=4 ttl=55 time=17.2 ms
64 bytes from pool.k1024.de (78.46.35.155): icmp_req=5 ttl=55 time=17.3 ms

--- pool.k1024.de ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 16.890/17.507/18.353/0.525 ms

I shall start pinging again and post results, Because i have clearly made people mad...






hmmmmmmmmmm.... Clearly i am wrong.... I suppose i fucked up on my earlier testing? Somehow?

Edit: the dude below me stated where he was from, So i mayaswell do the same so that the two sets of pings can be compared.
From Canada!

Well... I would switch to BTCguild.. But they are Merged Mining,

I call double bullshit on this.  Deepbit servers are going over a transatlantic link for you, there is absolutely no way you get better latency to Deepbit than some other servers.  Or did you mean you only tested ones that go over transoceanic links?

Actually BitPenny was the first one, but he gone bankrupt later.

Better latency means easier headshot!

Really? Why? This isnt an FPS competition. See how many stales you get, even with a slightly higher ping. Ill eat my shoe if you get 3% stales on a decent pool.