CSZiggy wrote:When my brother points his miner to this pool he never goes over 580 as a hashrate even at 100% efficiency. But on litecoinpool its over 610 for the 24-hour average.
Could this be reason my brother and I have very often seen higher payouts on litecoinpool.org It could very well be that PH does actually pay out the highest payout per hashrate. But with Litecoinpool.org seeing all of the hashrate being applied it just ends up paying out higher each day?
I guess I only ever thought about leaving coins on the table. Never thought to count the hashrate and make sure it was being credited equally and not being left on the table.
Part of this problem could be caused by work restarts that reduce hashrate because the miners require time to spin up to the next coin they are assigned. Litecoins have few work restarts because their block time is so long.
Last week, I modified the coin assignments so that we assigned a lower percentage of hashrate to the other coins, so that we don't get period of lots of blocks being found for those coins within a few seconds of each other.
However, the difference between 580 and 610 MH/s is less than the 12% advantage we had over straight LTC this week. The system automatically determines if it makes sense to assign miners to coins that would reduce their hashrate and only does so if the increase in profitability at the lower hashrate exceeds the reduced hashrate. While I'll continue to investigate this issue, if the reduction in hashrate is caused by work restarts, it isn't actually lowering profitability enough to cause other pools to be advantageous.
That said, I did find just now that we are not recording all stale shares to the database. I'm going to make some changes to record all stale shares. As with the stale blocks, this change will help us get a better idea of whether there are a large number of rejected shares due to some reason that we aren't aware of.
