Topic: █▓▒░-< [ZPOOL.CA][BTC Multipool] The miners multipool >-░▒▓█ Paid 925+ BTC - page 157. (Read 217687 times)

hey crackfoo.  Will i receive some Gongyicoin for the hash seeing it is no longer on the list of supported coins to mine today?  Yhsy4mitpjb1mwx893Y3XbicdB243aNzuc.

Looks good.

Should be sorted out now.

Let me know if you find other oddities.

Thanks, I know your busy adding new coins. Keep up the good work.

Works like a charm.... now i just gotta catch up lol.

Seems like something funky with memcached. Will continue to look into.

Thanks

yup!

You can add x13 and qubit, they aren't providing an estimate either.

Yes I've been monitoring X13. Amber has been forking quite a bit the past few days and now all the exchanges have it in maintenance. I'm not sure why no block has yet to be found on  Gongyicoin. We've been watching the logs and there's no errors so perhaps just really bad luck? We may rent some hash and give it a blast and see what happens.

The c=BTC should be what is set for your password. The problem is because TIT uses the same address version (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixes) as BTC so it's not possible to know which to use so it's 50/50 if nothing is specified in the password field. I think if you import your privkey for that BTC address into a TIT wallet, you'll get the TIT that has been sent...

If you've tried adding the c=BTC in the password field and nothing has changed, try using a new BTC address and make sure you specify c=BTC from the start.

Hope this helps

I dont get it.... i mine with both scrypt and sha256, and all i see is titcoin being deposited to my bitcoin address?

http://zpool.ca/?address=152XVMY1H8Ly43iZJhR6bzuhDgFjVvA38q

I have the miners set up to mine straight to btc (as far as i know).

Adding the -p  "c=BTC" to the end of the startup for the miners

in the profitability section;

'scrypt'   => 1,
'scryptn'   => 0.5,
'c11'      => 2.0,
'x11'      => 5.5,
'x13'      => 3.9,
'x14'      => 3.7,
'x15'      => 3.5,
'nist5'      => 6.0,
'zr5'      => 10.0,
'drop'      => 5.0;
'neoscrypt'   => 0.3,
'lyra2'      => 1.3,
'quark'   => 6,

I want to understand how to relate it;

Is scrypt the base, and these numbers are what determine the "normalization" between them like was done with hashrate reporting in xpool? 

Do I increase or decrease the value to give that algo more precedence?  By guessing I would think that the number is the multiplier; but even if it is, it's a crapshoot if it's an inverse effect code-wise.

MY first algo is X13;  but it never gets an initial response then rolls to lyra2 every time.  That has been one issue I have noticed so far...
It blipped into X11 once yesterday automatically;  but right back to lyra with defaults.  With my video card it's a 11Mh on lyra2, and 11.7Mh on X11;  so lyra is almost always more profitable for me by observation.

This evening it switched to X11 and stayed there;  I had a correlated change in earnings during that time.... so that lead me to ask about the tables because the description on the site is basic with just how to;  but little direction on effects either way =)

Still very impressed with the new site/service.

That's great to hear you're seeing better results and also great to hear you're liking zpool! I'm happy with it as well. It's much less complicated than xpools structure and way more robust, flexible and lightweight.

Cheers!

You can see the difference in % share just by changing the difficulty level;  and when it ramped up to where it should have been =)

awesome!   I wasnt sure if I could input the difficulty with a comman and the algos after.  Ill update my batch now.

BTW:  Theres a night and day difference between zpool and xpool.  I wont go back!

*edit*

fixed the problem!

You should be able to add the difficulty into the field as well. Like so:

ccminer -r 0 -a x11   -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:3533 -u joe -p d=1,x11,x13,x14,x15,quark,lyra2
ccminer -r 0 -a x13   -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:3633 -u joe -p d=1,x11,x13,x14,x15,quark,lyra2
ccminer -r 0 -a x15   -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:3733 -u joe -p d=1,x11,x13,x14,x15,quark,lyra2
ccminer -r 0 -a lyra2 -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:4433 -u joe -p d=1,x11,x13,x14,x15,quark,lyra2
ccminer -r 0 -a quark -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:4033 -u joe -p d=1,x11,x13,x14,x15,quark,lyra2

You can see the details for including diff with algo selection  here:

http://www.zpool.ca/site/multialgo

Let me know if this sorts you out!

Thanks for mining!

cool;  no sweat here;  I think I timed my miners over the weekend to only leave maybe a few hundred satoshi to die in xpool =)

I left worker names on and the pool seemed to ignore them;  but ill strip them out today just to be politically correct.

I do however have an issue with Zpool;   The pool keeps driving my difficulty up slowly;  and a large percent of my submitted shares aren't getting acknowledged in my miner;  my hashrate on the pool after my machine has been connected for over an hour seems to be half of what it actually is.  It feels like I could be loosing out on a percentage from this;  take a look at my ccminer screenshot below.   With other pools and a diff of 1 or 2;  I see an accepted message for every submitted message....  At first the shares are all acknowledged;  but after the stratum changes my difficulty a few times;  its missing out on a lot of shares.

Nothing else has changed otherwise between xpool and zpool.

Since the also-switching feature takes up the password slot;  I cant force a difficulty level =(  Maybe add it so you can just add it to the end of each on the list of algos like is done with the profit level selection?

zpool does not support the use of workername. Simply supply the BTC address you want to get paid in.

Unfortunately due to xpool's complexities, I have no way to remove pending payouts.

Thanks!

Hey crackfoo, me again.

I am wondering 2 things;  one;  the site doesnt specify but I assume usernames with a "[BTC ADDRESS].workername" is still valid for zpool?  Its not posted anywhere that I could find.

Second;  any chance of a snowball in hell of having final xpool remainder balances transferred to zpool?

After a short time trying it;  I think I'm sold on zpool.  I still kinda miss the graph from xpool though   I believe I got working a script in my batch file to refresh my video driver between instances of ccminer to make sure my hashrate doesnt drop if my driver freaks out.


Thanks again for your time and services!

Thanks!