Quote from: bible_pay on April 03, 2019, 11:35:24 PM

Quote from: Lichtsucher on April 03, 2019, 08:10:05 PM

So, I run my test against purepool, but I couldn't verify what happened on the main pool.
Maybe my tests are wrong, but in my tests, a single wallet gets around 25% more shares than a multiwallet setup. Looks like the overhead kills hit here.

My test system: I created an VM with ubuntu 18.04 and biblepay from the official repo. I created a new wallet and run it for 1 hour against purepool with 16 threads on my cpu (with 16 cores).
After that, I created 8 new wallets (each from scratch) and pointed them to a new biblepay adress in purepool, each with two threads. The cpu usage was the same with both setups.
I even gave the multiwallet setup two minutes more time, as they needed more time to fully start.

I tried it with more wallets (16), but my internet connection died trying it. Not sure why, I suspect my internet box died with the many open connections.
Maybe it wasn't enough wallets, but I can't test with more until the end of the week with more wallets.

Was my setup wrong?

Before I answer I just want to double check, how hard is each share (IE how many minutes does it take to solve one share on an avg pc), and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved? The reason I ask is pool.biblepay rejects nonces higher than the allowed nonce for the share.

One more dumb question, you said 25% more on solo than multi against purepool, I know this sounds relatively dumb but are you positive those figs are not reversed? As Capulo is seeing the opposite with 100 running for 4 hours.

It would be nice to see a duplicate of the findings.