Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!



  • Hey @crowetic really happy to hear we can test the pool.
    I would like to participate, but I only have 750GB. Can I come and join the party anyway... PLEASE!!!! I haven't been mining since all the flaflafla, I know I don't make that much with my 750GB, but every BURST count and every BURST I get is one more to help me reach my goals.
    Thank you for all you do and keep it up, BURST is awesome!



  • @Estie-Trixie The pool has a max DL of 24 hours, I would recommend you to join other pool because you will not be submiting almost no DLs to the pool...



  • @crowetic,

    It looks like the pool thinks Gustavo just won a block but recent blocks show his best DL was 3 days hours. Pool bug?

    Additionally, the link to http://explorer.burstnation.com/ for looking up blocks and miners etc. is dead, does not work.



  • @rds said in Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!:

    @crowetic,

    It looks like the pool thinks Gustavo just won a block but recent blocks show his best DL was 3 days. Pool bug?

    Additionally, the link to http://explorer.burstnation.com/ for looking up blocks and miners etc. is dead, does not work.

    Not sure where your looking but it shows his deadline was 3 hours. Shows he did not win any blocks.

    ![0_1496341684846_597ef14d-3bef-4e81-9f4e-edd99520423c-image.png](Uploading 100%)

    -IceBurst



  • @gpedro, ok thanks. I guess I have to wait. Have fun in the big kids pool, one day I will join you. :)



  • @Estie-Trixie LOL you can just join a smaller pool like pool.burstcoin.party or something ;D



  • @IceBurst said in Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!:

    @rds said in Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!:

    @crowetic,

    It looks like the pool thinks Gustavo just won a block but recent blocks show his best DL was 3 days. Pool bug?

    Additionally, the link to http://explorer.burstnation.com/ for looking up blocks and miners etc. is dead, does not work.

    Not sure where your looking but it shows his deadline was 3 hours. Shows he did not win any blocks.

    ![0_1496341684846_597ef14d-3bef-4e81-9f4e-edd99520423c-image.png](Uploading 100%)

    -IceBurst

    I'm looking at a queued payment of 1192.49 which is about what I would expect the block winner to receive. Additionally there are sequential lower deferred payments to each miner. There were no deferreds an hour ago as the pool paid out all deferreds about 12 hours ago and no blocks were won since the only one yesterday.

    There's only 240B n the pool account.



  • The pool has time to figure out if it should pay out or not, give it 20 blocks to see what it decides to do.

    -IceBurst



  • @IceBurst , I hear you, but isn't that when the pool thinks it won a block, sets up payments, then looks back to see if it really did win, then it pays. Here, there is no indication the pool thought it won. Like you and I both said, the shortest DL was 3 hrs, not even close to a win. So, that being said, I'm just pointing this out to @crowetic as this is a new version of code, it is in beta testing mode, and I'm one of the miners on the pool and I noticed what appeared to be an anomaly.



  • @rds Thanks sir, we'll keep an eye on it



  • @IceBurst , @crowetic,

    Why is the pool paying the fee account 3400B over the last two days. It's only hit 2 or maybe 3 blocks altogether?



  • @rds we personally put an additional 4K burst in to watch it, the program is designed to "sweep" unaccounted for incoming into the fee wallet.

    -IceBurst



  • @IceBurst , yes, I saw the 4k in, again just letting you know.



  • @IceBurst , @crowetic,

    Apart from the obvious cosmetic differences can you please describe what the differences are from the old ninja behind the scenes?

    Is this just a new front end to the old code or has it been worked up from scratch, if so is it a more robust / improved program and if so in what ways?

    Also can you please describe the algorithm used for the historic share. I know it used to be based in some way on the previous 50 Block share, but would be good to know the detail of how this is calculated?

    Thanks

    Rich



  • @RichBC said in Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!:

    @IceBurst , @crowetic,

    Apart from the obvious cosmetic differences can you please describe what the differences are from the old ninja behind the scenes?

    Is this just a new front end to the old code or has it been worked up from scratch, if so is it a more robust / improved program and if so in what ways?

    Also can you please describe the algorithm used for the historic share. I know it used to be based in some way on the previous 50 Block share, but would be good to know the detail of how this is calculated?

    Thanks

    Rich

    If you want to take a look at a snapshot of the sourced. Focus has released a copy of it on BN but I would hold off on actually using it for now as there ares still some bugs to we worked out.



  • @manfromafar Yes I had seen that, but was not wanting to have to go through the code, and was hoping that someone who has been involved in the development could give us the low down on the changes and improvements? To be brutally honest in terms of the cosmetics I preferred the old style one screen shows all approach.

    Rich



  • @RichBC

    So the specifics on block payouts, percentages, payout delays, percentages for current round are all customizable in a config file. In addition to just the "pretty" new interface there is a substantial rework on the back end to include even the service that provide the pages (httpd service). So some of the cool things this pool does is:

    • Asks multiple wallets for current block height to figure out who is forked who is not and what it should be using.
    • Has the ability to submit the active best deadline to multiple wallets, the old system submitted every deadline (less efficient).
    • The old Ninja ran on FreeBSD, the new one is CentOS 7 Secure Linux
    • The back end DB was upgraded from mySQL to MariaDB
    • While the primary port for submissions of nonces is on 8124 it can also accept submissions on port 80 to accommodate the mobile miner and proxy problems
    • Extensive logging has been added to the back end to trouble shoot

    There's a ton of changes as you can imagine. I am not the primary coder on this project but I am assisting with some trouble shooting and Unix configs. I'll see if I can get a more comprehensive list put together. I'm glad your getting your Dev news from the Devs and not someone that pretends to be one.

    -IceBurst



  • @IceBurst Thanks for the quick overview, much appreciated, sounds like there are some valuable changes and if widely deployed it would be a major improvement to the whole Mining network.

    If there is someone who can give a bit more detail that would be great and I am sure there are a lot of people like me that will not fully understand it but will be reassured by the sharing of the information.

    Great that the config is highly configurable but would be good both for Miners and Pool Operators if these parameters could be fully described and that any Admins running a Pool were open about the settings they are using?

    Rich



  • @IceBurst , @crowetic , Is the code available for anyone who wants to try and implement it?



  • @RichBC said in Ninja pool beta up and running - come test with us!:

    Great that the config is highly configurable but would be good both for Miners and Pool Operators if these parameters could be fully described and that any Admins running a Pool were open about the settings they are using?

    Rich

    Agree, more transparency is a good thing. For instance, later on in the mining phase, block transaction fees are going to be more important than block reward. I mentioned to @crowetic that it would be nice if the miners on this pool get these fees. He agreed, but I don't think it has been changed yet.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Burst - Efficient HDD Mining was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.