Slush Pool version 3 public beta launched!
Total Hash Rate Total Votes Total Points
▲68.95 Th/s ▼6.758 Th/s ▲4 ▼1 ▲49 ▼20
Adding multi-pools for sha256/scrypt/x11 etc (#62)

If the pool is going to implement mining different coins, lets have pools for sha256 only at first. I would personally prefer if we started off only using sha256 and then scrypt, and off to the smaller algorithms.

Using a multi-coin, automatic switching pool for your miners should be easy and must have some functionality in addition.

  • Being able to mine multiple coins based on profitability. But then being able to get rewards in your prefered coin OR any coin mined unexchanged.
  • Ability to auto-convert all mined coins to a pre-set coin (BTC is my suggestion).
  • Single pool and transparent use for the end user/client.
  • Extra feature would be to mine multiple coins based on "maximum coin input". This is the high risk, minimum income version that aims to get plenty of coins for the ones that are not very valuable yet, but could be in the future.

In addition to this, if the pool decides to go multi algorithm, lets say scrypt. The idea is to limit the automatic coin conversion to a coin in the same algorithm, for instance LTC, LOT or POT for scrypt. The same rule should apply to sha256 if the pool goes multi-coin and merged coin mining.

Additions, suggestions critique and anything else is welcome. If there are additions or clarifications, i will add them to the proposal. Thanks!

— sa3bib, 28 November 2014, 23:11

Comments & Updates

  • Proposal merged with #409
    17 July 2015, 13:07
  • Proposal merged with #412
    17 July 2015, 13:07
  • help,e
    — Jokerman, 03 July 2015, 14:07
  • hey, hashminebtc i hear what you are saying, but lets just say that sha256 is asic machines and "the other one" regardless of algorithm or principle is for gpu:s. this suggestion is only for adding perfectly compatible currencies for the same algorithm to a pool. and in no way am i implying that the devs should just "implement everything" at once. im suggesting and trying to make it very clear that no change should be big and no change should impact anything in a negative way. i think sha256 is the first step, adding all the coins there and see where it goes. sure, 50% at least will never be mined, and who cares right? when and if they ever peak, they are automatically mined and harvested. no need to buy meth and be awake 24/7, staring at the charts to figure out if there is a better coin to mine. and if so, manually change pools on all your rigs. i really love many of the features of coinking, cex and many others, but i also very much hate the not so obvious "maintenance fees" that eat away any chance of profit. this pool on the other hand is a great place with great friendly people. im betting everything i have on this pool from now on.
    — sa3bib, 29 December 2014, 20:12
  • I see that this was approved, I could add this feature if needed; Coinium-Serv is a great open-source project for Linux that I could add this feature by manuallly adding coins/algorithms that the majority of voters choose or use the redis code to Coinium-Serv and have it auto-matically switch to the most profitiable coin at the time end of each block.This would significantly increase the work load on the dedicated servers though as it would have toi store each users settings on what algorithims they are capable of mining, fetch coin value data at the end of each block and would be mining multiple coins simultaneously as not everyone is going to be able to mine scrypt ot X11 etc if they've already invested a considerable amount in SHA256 ASICs, or it could just be set to mine the most profitable sha256 coin....
    — hashminebtc, 22 December 2014, 05:12
  • Just like kingping said, there should be options. Option one being to mine the most profitable, and simply auto-convert into bitcoin. More profit, more options and no hassle for the end user. Option two would be to have a sha256-pool, where there are, lets say 20 coins. The user could be able to mine only the coins they pick from a list. This idea however would be serverside powerhungry and hard to implement. Option three is to have a combination that mines all coins, user picks if they want auto-convert or not. This all comes down to the current profit of mining each coin. The opposite is the "what if" approach. Mining the coins you get the most coins from and are probably the cheapest right now. This would be for the ones that want to collect say 1000 coins and then hold on to them until they may or may not peak in value.
    — sa3bib, 11 December 2014, 10:12
  • I agree with this but... I think all mined coins should be able to be converted to BTC, DGC already converts to BTC at Cryptsy even though it is a scrypt coin. The pool switching on the most profitable coin is a good idea but, I can understand some users would not want this, having a switch port and a straight port i.e. 10601 switching port 10701 stable port only mining single coin.
    — kingpin121, 09 December 2014, 20:12
  • @devlin85 - although it was suggested in the other proposal, my differs in some ways that make this much more easy to use and to like or dislike. In my opinion, we do not need more algo's here. Atleast not right now. Keeping the pool at the SHA256 algorithm makes all users capable of contributing to the merge with more SHA256-based coins or currencies. No adjustments or anything more than changing the url for the pool is needed on the end user. This is important because there might be some that do not want other crypto currencies to thrive or simply want to make a 100% backing to the bitcoin. Regardless, everyone should be able to mine what they want, but maybe limited to a few options. (all, sha256, some, or just btc for instance. just an example). If and when this works and there is a favourable backing to this, and only then, should other algo coins be implemented in my opinion. This will demand heavy work for some time and will not be easy to implement for the devs. Just to clear it up, LTC is a scrypt coin, that is not too different to BTC wich is a sha256 based coin.
    — sa3bib, 08 December 2014, 10:12
  • this was suggested here but I do agree!
    — devlin85, 07 December 2014, 02:12
  • Proposal state changed: Draft Approved
    26 November 2014, 16:11

All proposals

Support   Back to Top   

Operated by braiins systems. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook. BTC prices provided by BitcoinAverage