[Bitcoin-development] Decentralizing mining
luke at dashjr.org
Fri Jun 14 21:05:28 UTC 2013
On Friday, June 14, 2013 8:06:54 PM Peter Todd wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 09:23:14PM +0000, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > Might as well just use higher difficulty shares (each one audited) for
> > the same effect. Block proposals allow the miner to tell the pool its
> > transaction set once (per txset change) for any number of shares.
> That's a good point - the current practice most pools seem to follow of
> about a share per second seems very excessive to me. On the other hand,
> it does have good user optics. The right solution might be something
> akin to P2Pool where the UI level is telling the user shares are being
> found so it's clear "stuff is happening", but under the hood only a
> small subset are ever sent to the pool.
Share rate is relevant to more than user information - it also affects the
variance of reward/payout. I disagree with claiming shares are found when
they're not sent to the pool - this makes auditing and troubleshooting more
difficult; for example, see the GUIMiner bug where it reports shares despite
misinterpreting the pool's target and submitting nothing at all (this happens
when the pool uses pdiff 1).
> > > # Pool work
> > >
> > > So does eliopool already accept arbitrary shares like this and do the
> > > correct accounting already? (IE adjust share amount based on fees?)
> > > What happens when the pool doesn't get the share directly, but does
> > > see the new block?
> > >
> > > + possible protocol extensions
> > I don't follow.
> What part don't you follow?
I don't understand the first two questions here at all.
More information about the bitcoin-dev