What !?. The 1.75 is shared by the pool, not the .25. The .25 is directly paid to the farmer that won the block. What are you talking about?
Not in the case of NoSSD, since itâs an OG pool. Itâs 100% pooling, no farmer reward.
I looked at their payouts and they consist of the 1.75 portion. Where does the other .25 go? and why would anyone be part of this? Just sounds sketch as f@C(.
12 blocks (24 XCH) have been won so far with 23.46738 XCH paid out in total. The rest is below the min payout threshold (and some is fee at 0.5 %).
I see it now. I was clicking on the payouts and each of them said the total amount was 1.75. I kept clicking down and just found some for the .25.
But I still donât understand why someone would spend all the time and money to plot to something so limited. I can understand doing it back when there were not many options for pooling, before the official protocol. But the shear cost of plotting will out weigh any small percent of gains from the smaller plot size. And that isnât even considering the fact that you are now locked into this one single pool forever (or spend that time and money again to go somewhere else.)
I understand that what they have done is pretty cool. Technology wise ⌠But I donât see nearly enough benefit to put myself in that situation.
1 Like
The second stage plot compression is taking longer than the plotting time â 42min vs 26mins. Is there a way to speed up the second stage? @Dawson
This is precisely why I havenât bothered re-plotting my OG storage in favour of pool plots. Just not worth the effort and cost.
1 Like
farmers donât use their own keys. the key is pool ownerâs.all rewards go to pool ownerâs wallet first including the 0.25XCH. that is why they have to share the 0.25XCHs. so if their won a block, I donât think they know whose plot has won the block.
and if pool owner has plots, some thing is different. âpooling = solo , solo =farmingâ for him, as pool contract address and farmer address are same and he owns the key. so he may change the number of his own plots which is showed connecting to pool as long as he donot want to share some rewards. as it is closed source. pool farmers canât find the change and the additional reward they donât get unless they check blockchain data. it is same for showing blocks found on the website, only way to verify whether is true is to compare it to blockchain data. I think he can even do more, who knows! it is closed sourse!
âpooling = solo , solo =farmingâ for pool owner, you guys can easily figure out whether it is true.
As I have limited imaginationďźyou imagine what he can do with his key and a closed closed source pool.
Isnât the expression, not your keys, not your crypto? I made a point in this thread about 51% attacks. Are keys not part of that? All the plots would be part of their arsenal would they not under this âarrangementâ vs. typical pools where the pool itself doesnât have the same level of control over the net space? Sort of outside of my pay grade and maybe Iâm off. Maybe there is no big deal here attack wise. Not saying thatâs part of this. Not making that accusation. All Iâm asking is whether controlling your own keys vs. using just their key, makes any sort of difference when it comes to a threat to the security/exploit of the blockchain. Maybe much ado about nothing. However if Chia sees this pool as a security threat, where does that leave the pool and all the participants? I donât think in terms of, oh, 51%? That would never happen. The pool would never get to that point. As world champions always say, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!
3 Likes
Yep, Chia Inc running out of money is also possible.
1 Like
pssst, dont say this! 
in the end, someone will get the idea that this plotter is not that fast as noSSD say and write at there webside, especially when it is plotted with a lot of RAM. 
these people are absolutely trustworthy 
@mega22 do you run it on network share? The first phase can only be faster if a hard drive performance is very bad. With lots of ram it is only required to write spt file once and on the second stage it is required to read it and then write it back again. The read operation is probably a bottleneck in your case.
1 Like
No, itâs on an internal HDD. Yeh, it seems the read is the bottleneck. Although the drive is probably capable of 200MBps reads, I can only see 60-70MBps sustained. is there any parameter I can change to improve the generation of FPT? I have more than enough compute power and RAM on the plotter.
If you have lots of ram and it is absolutely crucial to you to make fpt files as fast as possible then you can probably write spt file to ram disk. The command line will be
--tmpfs /ramdisk:rw,size=100G nossd/client -d,tf /plots -d,s /ramdisk if you still use docker. I havenât tested this on windows though.
1 Like
I tried the additional parameters. I can see the process allocates extra 100GB RAM, but run time is still ~42minutes.
Does it take 42 minutes for the whole process or just finalization? It shall not create spt files in the destination directory now and the finalization phase should be reduced in time.
42 minutes for just the final SPTâ>FPT file generation. The last SPT file was created around 10 hours back. Since then it can created 13 FPT files.
It has finalized old spt files from the hdd. New spt files will be created inside /ramdisk directory and finalization will be faster. If our prediction is correct and reading from the hdd was the bottleneck.
That was my hunch too. Thanks for the clarification.