Quote from: KillerByte on December 26, 2013, 04:26:24 am

Quote from: balthazr on December 26, 2013, 02:40:39 am

hi KillerByte,

are you working on the pool server issues or on the payout, when will the payouts will happen? i got almost 1k MMC in your pool 

hey, here is the announcement:

Starting tomorrow, payouts will be manually executed. Your balance will go to 0, but shortly after you should recieve your payment.

Also, if this happens again and I cant figure out why, the pool is done.

I am sorry for all the delays, downtime, and else of the pool. I am sorry that there is no windows client. I am sorry for any other confusion.

Thanks for all the support as well, even though I have been a fail of a pool operator

hey KillByte,

you dont need too much "sorry", you're very good one and have a very good support on MemoryCoin by adding the first pool on the market.
Also you have put lot of efforts on the pool to make it better day by day.
The point is cause this is the first pool so lot of hashing power, lot of connections that you're may not expected...

So, after all, thanks you. Hopefully someone else can take care your pool.

@Just dont make its code too public, you know what i mean, mushrooms after rains...., diff to the moon.... normal users leave.... coin go nowhere 

Quote from: seusnow on December 26, 2013, 04:10:49 am

Quote from: balthazr on December 26, 2013, 02:40:39 am

hi KillerByte,

are you working on the pool server issues or on the payout, when will the payouts will happen? i got almost 1k MMC in your pool 

without windows client

this pool is died

Windows 32 bit:

Quote from: ig0tik3d on December 25, 2013, 11:45:34 am

https://mega.co.nz/#!ydhjharY!SS3CQCt_4OSev2XiaDZ2bnCNf94WHFNN8ZLsSVYp4cw windows 32bit version miner for pool (unstable version)
you can give me little donation MVTEcnoTrUAeYrd3yzXm3nd4S73yACDtMa 

It works pretty well.

Quote from: KillerByte on December 26, 2013, 02:07:52 am

the hashes are not wasted.

Think bitcoin mining: your ASIC goes through billions of hashes a second. Does it submit every single hash? No, just the ones that meet the target set by the server.

Does that help?

Yes, thanks Killer, although it doesn't explain why one out of 16 hashes are taken, or is that a probability?

I'm now getting system:111 messages, this is my output for the previous block:

[MASTER] work received
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
hash generated - 15802 / 1968 / 1683025740
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
system:111
connecting to 162.243.216.74:1339
[MASTER] work received

Now it is difficult even with the pools 

Quote from: KillerByte on December 25, 2013, 11:21:29 pm

Quote from: Gwynbleidd on December 25, 2013, 10:57:12 pm

Someone can tell me what is this: Foun solution - xxxx/xxxx/xxxx? Know what share is (is there diffrent value of shares, or every are the same?), but what is this solution? And nice, have bigger hash/m than on solo with wallet.

A share is when the miner prints "submit: " and then a hash... found hash just says when your computer makes a hash. One out of every 16 shares are taken.

everyone has to follow this policy. It makes it so that all shares are equally valued.

why every 16? is possible that change work during mining

Hell yeah! Primeminer shows 2-3 primes/s. WTF? Wallet told me, I was mining (for test) in speed ~3.17 h/m.

Quote from: KillerByte on December 25, 2013, 10:23:43 pm

Quote from: agnostik_one on December 25, 2013, 10:14:12 pm

i see you limited the number of workers... how about creating another pool with this limit? maybe on another port or something

yeah, I really should have multiple instances of the pool. That would be cool.

Unforunately, I would have to do some changes to the JSON-RPC, and make the web interface unified, but its a good idea. I could also license pool operators... if that makes sense... to run a instance of the pool publicly for mining, and the web interface could connect and retrieve stats and unify it as XPool. The other pool operators could work with me to improve the code and solve problems.

That still seems inefficient though...

yeah, it would be inefficient, but this is only meant as a temporary solution, until you get things under control... and also, if you mention the pool operators working with you, it might be exactly the collaboration you we're looking for... i don't know how you would choose them though