Can’t get my hash back up to where it was
I have been trying to read and figure it out. Doesn’t make sense on how when the fields grow in size your hash drops
The snowblossom is a harsh mistress.
Hash shouldn't drop when the fields go up unless your hybrid mining I thought. If you're mining in VPs then you might be having the same issue I'm noticing. Latest release is hashing slow, build from source and it's faster
more expensive to RAM mine in the cloud
I have 2 MH/s for $0.61/hr
snowday needs more power!
heh
I need to spend less time worrying about mining and more time coding
but I do know what it feels like to have a mining pool die on you
@Fireduck It just doesn't make sense to me logically. Lower fee, fancier website, was there first. I haven't seen Vauxhall advertise at all and they seem to have a lot more people.
Being confused upsets me more than losing.
yeah, I have no explanation
I would assume some relationship between pool operator and miners there and not worry about it
yeah, I'm not worried. :)
hey guys, does anyone know if getting two machines with 800kH/s is better than a single machine with 1.6Mh/s? I don't know how pool mining works. If it is percentage based, would I get more coins with the single machine with more performance, over long run?
@sweepo what matters is the amount you can get total
towards one address, I suggest
I get that
What I mean is, if a pool gives rewards percentage wise, would a single machine with 1.6-2Mh/s get more number of coins when compared with 2 machines each with half the high performance hash rate?
so if two machines, each has the same hashrate 'H', and they get total '2X' snow('X' for each) over some time period, would a single machine with hashrate '2H' get more than '2X' ?
no it would be the same
@sweepo No, the pool will reward the address based on percentage of shares it solved
not even that, your shares over the last 5 blocks
@Shoots but that’s the thing I am hybrid
and that's why your hashrate is down
because you have lower percentage of field in RAM
field is bigger but you didnt add more RAM
you get it? your relatively slow SSD is now doing a higher percentage of the work
does anyone think it could be a problem for snowblossom that it is or will become barely worth mining without specialised equipment, discouraging participation by people in the way that people can use their otherwise idle GPU for conventional algorithms? like a gamer can use their idle GPUs but snowblossom will quickly become something you can only do with something dedicated or specialised due to the large fields
@THX 1138 4EB no, that's the entire point. Specialty equipment won't really give an advantage
@Clueless it will, but that stuff costs tens of thousands per megahash down the line
@THX 1138 4EB the hope is that so few will afford stupid resources for mining that a flood of spare space on SSDs will just drown those into background noise
a bit of a chicken egg issue as it’s hard and slow to get started, so this mostly just draws in the negahash crowd currently
i’ll leave that typo in, appropriate enough
``` # field_size = (1024**3) * (2**field_index) # field_difficulty = 25 + field_index*2 ```
yeah i guess/hope so :slightly_smiling_face:
So with every field, lower hash
That can be a bit discouraging though people like those numbers
I could careless just trying to wrap my head around it
my hash too low only 1.48M Am I setting something wrong?
is mining in memory and is getting about 1.48M/s , can anyone verify if that looks right?
I get 1.7 with 32 logical cores
it’s more about seek dispatch density than cores - cores just mostly wait when mining
How can I run my local node on testnet ?
@AlexCrow you just do it. Set network=teapot
obviously
it should connect to one of mine
if you don't have ipv6, it might not be able to find mine
A known and puzzling bug
but shouldn't break your testnet
do you have ipv6? if so, http://snow-test-a.1209k.com:8080/ is a testnet explorer
only chumps don't have ipv6
I dunno about ipv6 but I've connected and it's syncing
cool
note, it will take way longer to sync than mainnet
some asshat was doing a bunch of load testing on testnet
let me know if you need some testnet coin
there are 1.6 million transactions on it
ok, thank you
`snowblossom.lib.ValidationException: Block too far into future` hmmmm
anyone know about this?
system time wrong?
suppose that is possible but I don't think so
iirc it was the cause of this problem.
yeah, actually that could be it
`offset 31306.395460 sec`
thats better. thanks @fydel
hamster power! :hamster:
oh, you're hamster :wink:
psst. dont tell anyone.
That is a lot of seconds
I'm glad I added that reporting :wink:
me too!
@fydel vote yes on sip2!
Who is in charge of http://snow.protopool.io? I used to know but have lost track.
@Protovist
I pinged proto yesterday to vote yes on SIP2
i guess I haven't won him over on sip2 yet
trying to help the cause here
I think he had some concerns about sip2
did he bring them to you?
he did not grace me with a response :disappointed:
He had concerns, I tried to address them
he might still think I am nuts
I don't think I am, but it is hard to discount the possibility
lol
arent we all?
My concerns have been satisfied... just haven't had a chance to update the config yet.
ok, cool
curious to hear what your concerns were though
read the backlog
sip2
it was in <#CB4CYRTPG|mining> sunday evening
hm sorry, i'm not 100% fair there as we do not have infinite backlog on free slack
too used to paid-for slack in other contexts
https://snowblossom.slack.com/archives/CB4CYRTPG/p1529901220000147 Once someone is creating blocks with a higher snowfield, the weighting means that only blocks from that field will be added to the main chain.
yeah, I wish they had some sort of in between that wasn't so much per seat
had no idea that mining channel exists
just hope no one puts you in #snowfurries
modifier-t for the channel list
a bit clunky, that is
that <#CAT0R3Z8E|blocks> channel is riviting
do we have a block explorer ?
Can we specify a source address from which tx are sent from?
Only if you edit the client code pretty hard