I’m also still getting higher Sol/s and what seem like higher payouts.
Just to clarify, Zecproxy doesn’t lower latency, but it does reduce the number of connections making http requests. This saves bandwidth and should be more efficient, especially for miners with more than 10 rigs and speeds that are less than a fiber connection.
Essentially your miner will connect to a LOCAL proxy server, the proxy server connects to the pool and distributes work to each connected miner. If you connect to a non-local proxy server the benefit is lost.
I’ve set one up before but it was proprietary and ended up giving me less Sol/s, so I decided it was either too slow or unfairly taking more fee shares. I haven’t tried Zecproxy yet, but will be testing in the next few days after I get a nanopool baseline. Hopefully it doesn’t make a difference that this is implemented in JS rather than Go or Python. I’ll report back once it’s tested and up.
Initially it seems as though the number of rejected shares has decreased
I also recieve jobs more frequently, perhaps something to do with the higher difficulty target
Interesting
maybe some of the people in “lets talk about asic’s” with rigs, IF they are on FP, should switch too. They say they don’t want centralization but don’t mind giving it to FP
I wonder about the difficulty. Logically, more difficult Shares are worth more but harder to find with low powered mining equipment
Nanopool share difficulty is static equal to 25600. So I guess potentially you could turn up the juice on flypool but they’ve got too heavy a hand anyways (even with the benefit of the doubt)
Edit- yea, higher payouts in shorter increments :]
The difficulty could be a small part of the issue but is it enough to count for 5-7%? It’s not worth trying it to find out at this point. I’ll stick with np.
Same here, thats what the benefit of the doubt was for, could have something to do with it but goona stay too, like I said, too heavy that FP, plus I prefer Nano pools interpolated graph, just weird like that
My main reason for leaving Flypool was that they have over a majority of the hashpower, absurdly so. If I see any more ZEC than I would have seen, great. I left to be responsible nonetheless.
However, Flypool did have a cool feature and that is that it would email if a worker goes down. I wish Nanopool had that…if they do, please direct me to where to do it
After several days I can confirm that I’m making at least an additional 5% over Flypool (closer to 7% right now). Miners interested in profits should switch to nanopool.
I’m on supernova at the moment I’d like to try out nanopool but isn’t the minimum payout 1 coin? Because when I was on flypool I set my payouts to every 0.1 which took a little under 2 hours before the difficulty increase…
Nanopool min is 0.01 and max is 10. If supernova is working you and you think they are being honest I would stay there. I think it’s only Flypool that is undercounting shares.
I swapped to nanopool I’ve been mining on it for about 10 mins now or so but when i try to go to stats page on my miners all i get is “Remember: to add your account to the database you should find at least one share”
It updates every few minutes. There is a hard refresh button as well. You won’t see accurate shares for a few hours until the PPLNS system has a baseline. You should see accurate Sol/s in <= 15 mins.
