*removed*

Quote from: n00b2013 on January 09, 2014, 06:39:11 pm

anyone having pay-out issues ? i got payment marked paid, but 12hrs later its not in my wallet still ...

I'm having payout issues also, said paid on day 7 and didnt get it yet, already did -salvagewallet option and -rescan option,
on https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Transactions/b53f58efb0e853667e175ea2f7f214406447d6e9ee74fe5a801b17c826dcc5a2
transation was made but on
https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PZM9sKwWyQxqXee1DWewYCGvx5fxGVKjjA
didnt reach my wallet yet even with full sync

Do we have a split in the coin chain? Just asking... when there is such a big pool running?

My wallet currently says:
"blocks" : 41027

Check yours.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2114.0
https://github.com/dave-andersen/cudapts

Thanks! Definitely will have a look

Quote from: jabbaah on January 08, 2014, 11:25:52 am

Quote from: noobster on January 08, 2014, 11:12:42 am

also for fellow miners i did notice one thing:

i have 4 core cpu and 4 gig mem and I get better results if I fire up more threads @ 512M (say like 7 gives 3,5GB) than only four (given 4 threads on cpu)

conlusion: use more threads to fill up unused memory

waiting for your thoughts on that =)

That's intended. The more CPU power you put into mining, the higher the output. Configuring more RAM per CPU core only gives an advantage if you have very fast RAM in your machine. Testing this out is up to you. Anyway the difference is only very small. The big difference is the number of cores like you correctly stated already.

But the quad multicore cpu can handle more threads without any problem. My thought was not to provide more ram per thread, instead fire up more threads to fill up unused memory.

thanks

Ah, sorry. My fault. I should read an article more carefully before hitting the reply button. ;-)

That's indeed interesting. One should think that 4 threads on a 4 core cpu is 100% load and cannot be more increased.

Is there is significant difference? How much collisions/minute is the difference (4 threads / 7 threads)?

How to get MemoryCoins from your Protoshares wallet is only possible when you have direct access to the wallet.dat file. Mining with beeeeer pool does not give you your own wallet (file), therefore it's not possible.

But you can get your MemoryCoins as follows:

Backup your Protoshares wallet.dat file (either by the 'backupwallet' command in Debug window of the Qt-Wallet, or by simply copying the wallet.dat to another location on your filesystem. Then install the MemoryCoin wallet program on your local computer but do not yet start it. I usually use the Linux wallet programs where you have to copy the Protoshares wallet.dat (the copy only of course) in the ~/memorycoin subdirectory. On Windows it should be somewhere under C:\User\<Username>\AppData\Roaming\MemoryCoin - you have to create the MemoryCoin subdirectory and also note that the AppData directory is a hidden one on Windows which will only become visibile when changing the display options for Windows Explorer.

After having copied the wallet.dat to the correct location you can startup the MemoryCoin wallet and magically it will produce 10% MemoryCoin out of your Protoshares balance. Please also note that only the balance from sometime in December 2013 will taken into account, therefore you must use the wallet.dat from the Protoshares wallet software you used this time - even when you transferred those PTS to another account meanwhile.

Hope this helps to clarify how Protoshares and getting MemoryCoins from PTS is working. I tested this procedure already and I've got my share of MMC this way.

My PTS:
PZyVvDjjKnoCqmboDFT7ZM7TcDhZ38vWgf

Same for me. No block confirmation for the last ~ 14 hours or so.

Hopefully this does not trigger a new chain of orphans...

Hi,

newbie. just wondering, does this apply the more servers you have the more PTS you can mine? or better few servers but higher processors?

TIA,

Mike

The more cores, the more PTS you can mine. Of course those cores should also have a reasonable performance.
Therefore it's depending on core speed (and numbers), not the number of servers.