Quote from: newmz on July 21, 2017, 03:44:39 PM

I was watching the zpool page for my wallet address & noticed that, for timetravel at least, a huge discrepancy between the hashrate recorded at zpool and what NemosMiner (or whatever ccminer he uses for timetravel) is actually hashing. I saw 150mh/s at my machine but only 1.5mh/s at zpool, and a 97.5% figure in the rejection column. The Ccminer window on my machine wasn't showing any rejections. So what is the real number? I usually see the number at zpool is way lower than what the actual mining software is reporting. Is this a problem with zpool's stat collection or is it because I am geographically a long way from zpool's server?

I have personally disabled timetravel algo on Nemos because zpool does not ever come close to correctly displaying its hashrate.

Quote from: newmz on July 21, 2017, 03:44:39 PM

Also, earlier in this thread I see people discussing switching the "interval" because it is supposedly too low. I don't understand what difference this makes, but if the "profitability" of all these algos is changing very quickly, don't we want to change with it? I also don't understand where this "profitability" figure comes from or why it changes so often - but if something has a high profitability at any given time and we start mining it (but it changes often and quickly) aren't we likely to be mining something that WAS profitable when the measurement was taken, but if it's so volatile we are only doing well if it happens to stay high (which they rarely seem to)?

Essentially, one person has tested switching algos on NemosMiner at various time intervals to explore those various intervals' effects on profitability, but not to any degree which can be considered conclusive. All we can effectively say is that at the time he conducted the test, 3000-second intervals were performing the best for him.

I'm testing 30-min intervals right now.