Most conventional pools have an LP time of 10 minutes. They never LP except on a block change. Pools which merge mine (like Bitminter) have an LP interval of ~ 3 minutes (LP on BTC block change and roughly 2.5 LTC block changes per 10 minutes).
Pools could have more frequent LP and it is possible that at some point in the future LP could be used to update tx list when high value (fee) tx come in. It is also possible BFL modifies their firmware to allow shorter intervals which eliminate the issue.
p2pool is kinda rare in that it has a VERY short LP interval and BFL single is kinda rare in that it has a very long batch interval. That overlap is non-optimal.
Topic: Why does the BFL Single produce ~50% stales with P2Pool? - page 2. (Read 3240 times)
The reason why isn't anything deceptive.
BFL singles hash an entire 2^32 nonce range all at once. When the card finished it returns any found hashes. 2^32 nonces = 4 billion. @ 800 MH/s that is 5 seconds. p2pool has a very short LP interval of 10 seconds which means routinely before the BFL Single finished the data has gone stale.
GPU get around this (for other reasons) by using intensity. They don't run full nonce range in one pass. In cgminer for example 2^(15+intensity) hashes are processed in one "run". So 400 MH/s GPU at intensity 8 will do 2^(15+8) = 8.4 million hashes at once. 8.4 / 400 = 0.021 seconds. This means less shares go stale due to block change.
You can simulate the same effect (no idea if stable) by using an ultra high intensity in cgminer with a GPU. 400 MH/s GPU @ intensity 16 will also have an astronomical stale rate.
BFL singles hash an entire 2^32 nonce range all at once. When the card finished it returns any found hashes. 2^32 nonces = 4 billion. @ 800 MH/s that is 5 seconds. p2pool has a very short LP interval of 10 seconds which means routinely before the BFL Single finished the data has gone stale.
GPU get around this (for other reasons) by using intensity. They don't run full nonce range in one pass. In cgminer for example 2^(15+intensity) hashes are processed in one "run". So 400 MH/s GPU at intensity 8 will do 2^(15+8) = 8.4 million hashes at once. 8.4 / 400 = 0.021 seconds. This means less shares go stale due to block change.
You can simulate the same effect (no idea if stable) by using an ultra high intensity in cgminer with a GPU. 400 MH/s GPU @ intensity 16 will also have an astronomical stale rate.
so basically you must solo mine if using a BFL single then? or are there any pools where the LP is long enough that the Singles can shine on? I have a single 5970 (at the moment) on bitminter, but have some cash coming my way to get a couple of singles in a week or two and don't want to have it wasting time on a pool it won't work under.
The reason why isn't anything deceptive.
BFL singles hash an entire 2^32 nonce range all at once. When the card finished it returns any found hashes. 2^32 nonces = 4 billion. @ 800 MH/s that is 5 seconds. p2pool has a very short LP interval of 10 seconds which means routinely before the BFL Single finished the data has gone stale.
GPU get around this (for other reasons) by using intensity. They don't run full nonce range in one pass. In cgminer for example 2^(15+intensity) hashes are processed in one "run". So 400 MH/s GPU at intensity 8 will do 2^(15+8) = 8.4 million hashes at once. 8.4 / 400 = 0.021 seconds. This means less shares go stale due to block change.
You can simulate the same effect (no idea if stable) by using an ultra high intensity in cgminer with a GPU. 400 MH/s GPU @ intensity 16 will also have an astronomical stale rate.
BFL singles hash an entire 2^32 nonce range all at once. When the card finished it returns any found hashes. 2^32 nonces = 4 billion. @ 800 MH/s that is 5 seconds. p2pool has a very short LP interval of 10 seconds which means routinely before the BFL Single finished the data has gone stale.
GPU get around this (for other reasons) by using intensity. They don't run full nonce range in one pass. In cgminer for example 2^(15+intensity) hashes are processed in one "run". So 400 MH/s GPU at intensity 8 will do 2^(15+8) = 8.4 million hashes at once. 8.4 / 400 = 0.021 seconds. This means less shares go stale due to block change.
You can simulate the same effect (no idea if stable) by using an ultra high intensity in cgminer with a GPU. 400 MH/s GPU @ intensity 16 will also have an astronomical stale rate.
If you're not gonna be helpful why bother posting at all..
Links stating that p2pool and BFL Singles don't play nicely:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.813269
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.815283
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.803408
Links stating that p2pool and BFL Singles don't play nicely:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.813269
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.815283
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.803408
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Proof from someone with a BFL Single running it on p2pool without 50% shares would be better...
Lacking proof Osama is alive means he's dead? Give me a break.I'll link to the post where I read it produces 50% stales here when I find it - give me 5 minutes..
Try leading with that next time and you might find me much more receptive.
I've heard that the BFL single doesn't work with P2Pool as it produces about 50% rejected shares, which is insanely high.
Proof or
Proof from someone with a BFL Single running it on p2pool without 50% rejected shares would be better...
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
I've heard that the BFL single doesn't work with P2Pool as it produces about 50% rejected shares, which is insanely high.
Proof or
I've heard that the BFL single doesn't work with P2Pool as it produces about 50% rejected shares, which is insanely high.
Why is this?
Is it possible that the hashing is not actually being done on the chip itself? And it's just taking place on an external server then being submitted to the P2Pool node, which would maybe explain why the stale rate is so high due to network latency? (especially since BFL refuse to say what chip they are actually using in their Singles and they don't seem to fit any existing chip specification as far as I'm aware). I find it all a bit suspicious to be honest.
Thanks
Links stating that p2pool and BFL Singles don't play nicely:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.813269
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.815283
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.803408
Why is this?
Is it possible that the hashing is not actually being done on the chip itself? And it's just taking place on an external server then being submitted to the P2Pool node, which would maybe explain why the stale rate is so high due to network latency? (especially since BFL refuse to say what chip they are actually using in their Singles and they don't seem to fit any existing chip specification as far as I'm aware). I find it all a bit suspicious to be honest.
Thanks
Links stating that p2pool and BFL Singles don't play nicely:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.813269
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.815283
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.803408
Jump to: