Re: Vertcoin-Adaptive N-factor Scrypt-No more ASICs-[EXCHANGES/AMAZON/ATM/MERCHANTS]
At current stage, any miner is welcome as we need to get 'time to block' to reasonable value (lets say 100Mhs for now).
Which network is better for particular miner is not exact, depends on how much variance you like. Typically, it's ideal if 'time to share' < 'time to block' for particular miner, assuming that pool has at least 2 hours to block.
What we are missing now badly is node scanner to inform people about second network.
Also, second network can grow very quickly if at least one big node from first network switches to second. And this helps to both networks, second gains needed hashrate whilst first lower share difficulty without impacting time to block much. Also without changing worker port, this can be done almost instantly. For miners this is also no problem as shares gained in first network will be awarded by rest of network. But I'm afraid pool operators have no reason to do it as this could lead to miners leaving if they don't like this move. At the opposite side, there are many angry miners mining on p2pool and getting nothing, which can be attracted.
I'm also curious about specifiing second network as low hashrate network. Yes, it is for now. But as there is no way how to enforce which network particular miners will join. One time second network can become bigger than first. Lets rather say 1st and 2nd network and educate miners about time to block/time to share consequences on p2pool.
Which network is better for particular miner is not exact, depends on how much variance you like. Typically, it's ideal if 'time to share' < 'time to block' for particular miner, assuming that pool has at least 2 hours to block.
What we are missing now badly is node scanner to inform people about second network.
Also, second network can grow very quickly if at least one big node from first network switches to second. And this helps to both networks, second gains needed hashrate whilst first lower share difficulty without impacting time to block much. Also without changing worker port, this can be done almost instantly. For miners this is also no problem as shares gained in first network will be awarded by rest of network. But I'm afraid pool operators have no reason to do it as this could lead to miners leaving if they don't like this move. At the opposite side, there are many angry miners mining on p2pool and getting nothing, which can be attracted.
I'm also curious about specifiing second network as low hashrate network. Yes, it is for now. But as there is no way how to enforce which network particular miners will join. One time second network can become bigger than first. Lets rather say 1st and 2nd network and educate miners about time to block/time to share consequences on p2pool.
I've got about 2.5mh/s on my private p2pool. I think I'm on the "large" one, as we have 1052mh/s. How exactly do I switch to the small one? When I set it up I saw two VTCs "vtc" and "vtc2", and I chose the former. Just change to "Vtc2" to use the small one?
M
If you want to setup own node, you should use https://github.com/donSchoe/p2pool-n or https://github.com/Lovok/p2pool-n with --net vertcoin2 startup option.
Or use one of public nodes:
http://lovok.no-ip.com:9172
http://us-east.p2pools.net:9172
http://208.43.199.115:9172
http://vert.marcsi.ch:9172
http://vtc.cubeconnex.com:9172
http://vertcoinpool.cloudapp.net:9172
Congratulation on the 2nd p2pool network reaching the 100Mhz milestone! In fact, the 2nd network pool has a pool rate of 152 Mhz as I write. Now that the 2nd network has grown a lot, low-hash miners are again feeling the 'pain' - time-to-share for a 100Khz-200Khz miner is more than 4.5 hours! With variance, it can be a day before he can get a share. How about creating a new 3rd p2pool for the low-hash miners?