Solo mining or pool
There are a multitude of reasons both for and against mining pools. Although a pool has a much larger chance of solving a block and winning the reward, that reward will be split between all the pool members. Therefore, joining a pool creates a steady stream of income, even if each payment is modest compared to the full block reward which currently stands at 6. Difficulty level is another factor to keep in mind when considering solo mining. Indeed, pools are a way to encourage small-scale miners to stay involved.
We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Content:
- Bitcoin Miner Earns $235,000 Rewards by Singlehandedly Solving a Block
- Cryptocurrency - Individual Mining or Mining in a Pool?
- Crypto Mining Pool
- Solo VS Pool Mining: How to choose the right mining option?
- Mining alone? What is solo mining and is it profitable?
- Jared M. Smith, PhD
- Mining Monero : Which Is Better: Solo Mining or Pool Mining Monero?
Bitcoin Miner Earns $235,000 Rewards by Singlehandedly Solving a Block
Blockchain as a decentralized distributed ledger is revolutionizing the world with a secure design data storage mechanism. In the case of Bitcoin, mining involves a process of packing transactions in a block by calculating a random number termed as a nonce. The nonce calculation is done by special nodes called miners, and all the miners follow the Proof of Work PoW mining mechanism to perform the mining task.
The transaction verification time in PoW-based blockchain systems, i. It needs to be quicker if a system adapts PoW-based blockchain solutions, where there are thousands of transactions being computed at a time. Besides this, PoW mining also consumes a lot of energy to calculate the nonce of a block.
Mining pools resulting into aggregated hashpower have been a popular solution to speed up the PoW mining, but they can be attacked by using different types of attacks. Parallel computing can be used to speed up the solo mining methods by utilizing the multiple processes of the contributing processors.
In this research, we analyze various consensus mechanisms and see that the PoW-based blockchain systems have the limitations of low transaction confirmation time and high energy consumption. We also analyze various types of consensus layer attacks and their effects on miners and mining pools. To tackle these issues, we propose parallel PoW nonce calculation methods to accelerate the transaction verification process especially in solo mining. We have tested our techniques on different difficulty levels, and our proposed techniques yield better results than the traditional nonce computation mechanisms.
The use of blockchain technology is not limited to the cryptocurrencies now but is also being used in other industries like transportation, automotive industry, supply chain management [ 2 ], healthcare [ 3 , 4 ], and agriculture sector [ 5 , 6 ]. Blockchain offers advantages like transparency and immutability, but it also has some limitations specially when the PoW is used in solo mining.
Proof of Work PoW [ 7 , 8 ] is one of the first blockchain mining algorithms popularized by Bitcoin, and now many blockchain technologies use it for transactions confirmation.
The principle behind PoW is to solve a mathematical puzzle, and a reward is given to the miners who solve this complex problem. In PoW mining, miners need to pack transactions in a block and use a brute-force mechanism to find a nonce, which satisfies a given difficulty level. All the miners are given equal opportunity to find the nonce, and in case of success, they are given mining rewards as well as transaction fees.
As mentioned in the literature, such as [ 9 ], the mining process works approximately as shown in equation 1. The cryptographic problem of computing a double SHA hash has to be solved by a miner denoted by M. If miner M finds a valid solution s , miner M appends block B to the blockchain at miner M and broadcasts B, n, h, x to the blockchain peer-to-peer network.
Nonce values are numeric values that are concatenated with block data before performing the mining task. The block data is then given to a hashing function SHA to get a hash of a targeted difficulty level. If the targeted difficulty level is not achieved, then the nonce value is incremented and again concatenated with block data before applying SHA The whole process continues until a hash that satisfies the given difficulty level is achieved.
Once nonce is found, the block is broadcasted to the blockchain network. The nonce finding process in typical PoW is described in Figure 1. PoW is a complex task that takes much more time and consumes a huge amount of energy [ 10 , 11 ].
A popular method to increase the chances of success is to make a pool of mining resources by collaborating with other miners and dividing the reward consequently. The consolidated pool of resources builds more hashpower and increases their chance to succeed, but it decreases the chances of success if a miner wants to perform solo mining.
Besides, these attackers can attack miners and mining pools as mentioned in Table 2 to influence the public blockchain systems. In this paper, we propose algorithms to parallelize nonce computation of the PoW solo mining by assigning different ranges of nonce values to multiple processes. The proposed algorithms not only speed up the PoW mining process but also reduce energy consumption.
Rather than applying pure brute force through aggregated hashpower, our proposed algorithms based on parallel computing [ 29 ] follows the principle of divide and conquers and subdivides a complex task into subtasks, which are then processed in parallel on a single machine.
All the processes try to solve the subtasks of nonce computation in parallel at the same time, and once a processor finds a solution, it is communicated to all other processes. The proposed parallel PoW is much faster than the sequential version and saves energy, thus reducing the carbon footprint. Progressive algorithm: multiple processes are assigned consecutive nonce values, and in case of failure in an iteration, jump to the next nonce value a jump of 8 values in case of 8 processes in next iteration and test the proposed parallel algorithms on different difficulty levels.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: The literature review is discussed in Section 2 , and the proposed solo mining algorithms are given in Section 3. Section 4 presents the performance analysis of proposed techniques, and the paper is concluded in Section 5.
Scalability is the main issue in PoW-based public blockchain systems, and researchers are working on different solutions based on hashing algorithms and consensus mechanisms to tackle this issue. Some related work typically related to the scalability issue of PoW is discussed in this section. The work in [ 30 ] introduced a new protocol to improve blockchain performance by changing the chain data structure to Graph Chain.
Their parallel mining mechanism is focused on the selection of leaders among M miners. By solving a puzzle, miners can become leaders, and leaders are assigned duty for a period. The authors suggested that transaction confirmation speed can be increased by allowing more leaders to do PoW mining tasks in parallel.
In [ 31 ], the authors proposed an accelerated process of PoW mining. They built a process that carries out selection of a manager, work distribution, and a reward system. In their method, miners can use the same transaction data same transaction hash but cannot use the same nonce values; thus, no multiple miners can carry out the same mining task.
Same as the study in [ 30 ], the focus of [ 31 ] is on miners selection. The work in [ 32 ] also proposed a parallel mining protocol. In their protocol, each transaction is connected to at least two transactions that are verified, and all miners need to verify any new transactions. Their focus was also on miners but not on the actual mining process. Consensus algorithms [ 33 , 34 ] are decision-making processes for a group, where participants of a group support the decision that is best for everyone.
To overcome the scalability issue of PoW, other consensus mechanisms are also introduced, which are discussed with the help of the comparative analysis provided in Table 1. Each consensus mechanism shown in Table 1 has its strengths and weaknesses and could be used in different types of blockchain systems. But the most common consensus algorithm in public blockchains is PoW, which has time and energy consumption issues associated with it. In this research, our focus is on scalability of such blockchain systems, which intend to use PoW specially in solo mining.
Security is an essential feature in a variety of systems and is very important issue in blockchain-based systems. As our research work is based on consensus mechanism and mining, we focus on the consensus layer attacks and highlight the research work done to mitigate them. In selfish mining attack [ 65 ], a selfish miner in a mining pool uses selfish strategies to get more rewards than the honest miners.
The selfish miner tries to withhold a validated block and stops its broadcasting to mining pool network but continues to mine the next block. In this way, a selfish miner demonstrates more PoW than other miners of the mining pool. Doubles pending [ 15 ] is a digital cash scheme flaw, in which the attacker spends a digital token more than once, as a digital token is associated with a digital file that can be duplicated.
In bribery attack, some miners act rationally and accept bribes from attackers to increase their reward. In block withholding attack, a miner who has mined a block does submit it but abandons it and causes a mining pool and loses all bitcoin rewards.
In balance attack [ 26 ], attackers select miners that have the same mining capabilities, and rather than entering into mining competition with other miners, they defer the messages between the selected miners. Consensus Delay is the time between the block propagation to block storage after the consensus [ 68 ].
In a supply chain system, attackers can use consensus delay attack to interrupt the information propagation and, hence, can easily create a double-spent transaction by refuting the vote of an authorized user [ 13 ]. In Table 2 , we did a comparative analysis of different attacks, which could eventually influence the working of consensus mechanism and mining process.
Our research work could be beneficial in blockchain systems, which avoids the mining pools but rather wants fast solo mining protocols. If a system adopts solo mining, then definitely it will have to bear the consequences of more time and energy consumption.
We proposed two parallel commuting based techniques to make the solo mining faster and cheaper in terms of energy consumption. Two main performance indicators of PoW include transaction verification time and energy consumption and both are tackled in our proposed parallel processing-based algorithms. In our proposed techniques, we did not alter the core working of PoW, but building upon the existing research, we proposed different nonce value selection methods before performing the PoW mining on multiple processes.
First of all, the performance of PoW mining as described in Algorithm 1 is tested. Algorithm 1 is tested on different difficulty levels, and the time taken to compute the nonce value on each difficulty level is computed as shown in 3; then, we compared it with our proposed parallel PoW techniques.
We did not change the string in the whole process but varied the difficulty levels to calculate the mining time at each difficulty level for PoW and parallel PoW techniques. Table 3 is generated by implementing Algorithm 1 on the CPU; it contains difficulty levels, nonce values, and time taken in seconds to perform the mining task on constant block data.
As shown in Table 3 , there is a significant amount of change in the nonce values and time taken in seconds as we increase the difficulty levels from 1 to 8. Time is almost constant from difficulty levels 1 to 4 but rapidly changes from difficulty levels 5 to 8, which shows that PoW mining becomes difficult on higher levels of difficulty.
To address the time consumption issue as shown in Table 3 , we have introduced two parallel processing-based PoW mining algorithms and done multithreading and multiprocessing in both methods as shown in Figure 2. The workflow and proposed mechanism of the interleaved approach are shown in Figure 3.
The pseudocode of the interleaved approach is given in Algorithm 2. In this approach, we make 8 nonce value ranges as given in Figure 4. These ranges are given to multiple CPU processes to compute the nonce value.
Once a process finds a nonce that satisfies the difficulty level, other processes stop working. The nonce value is then propagated to the blockchain network, and in case of acceptance, the reward is given to the miner. The results of the multiprocessing interleaved approach are given in Table 4. We performed the mining task by giving subarrays to multiple threads to calculate the hash of a given difficulty level.
Once a thread is successful in getting the resultant nonce, the whole process stops. Results computed by the multithreading interleaved approach are given in Table 5. In this proposed approach, the PoW mining process is divided into 8 processes, and each process is assigned nonce values from 1 to 8. If a nonce value does not satisfy the desired difficulty level, it is updated by adding 8 in the previous value, and the mining process is repeated until one of the processes gets the desired nonce value.
Once the solution is found, all other processes stop working, and the nonce value is propagated to the whole network. The workflow and proposed mechanism of parallel proof of work progressive approach are given in Figure 5.
The pseudocode of a progressive approach is given in Algorithm 3. In the multiprocessing progressive approach, the PoW mining process is assigned to 8 different processes.
Each process initially assigned the nonce values from 1 to 8, and in the iteration, it updates the nonce value by adding 8 into it. If a process finds a nonce value that satisfies the given difficulty level, all other processes stop working, and the nonce value is propagated to the blockchain network.
Cryptocurrency - Individual Mining or Mining in a Pool?
Toggle navigation ergo. We have reduced the block unlock time from to 72 in order to pay the miners faster. Miners will receive funds in the wallet 10x faster. HeroMiners is your new home for Ergo Mining! Easy and profitable mining pool for Ergo coin. Stable Ergo pool with very low fees.
Crypto Mining Pool
Cryptocurrency cloud mining service may have their challenges, but the idea of having enough Bitcoins will convince you to meet those challenges. Although the price of bitcoin is always fluctuating, when you want to sell your coin, you are faced with a fair price. Currently, more than 18 million bitcoins have been mined. With a total of 21 million bitcoins, there are only less than 3 million more bitcoins to mine. In mining, there are two types of operations:. Solo mining VS pool mining discussed in this article. Individual mining or solo mining means single and independent mining. In individual mining, users do not have to rely on a third-party system to mine a cryptocurrency. In the concept of solo mining VS pool mining, we find that solo miners work individually.
Solo VS Pool Mining: How to choose the right mining option?
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons! This is a really weird pool! Paid are ok, but don't you ask yourself if is it possible that the pool use the hashrate given by miners to mine with another adresse just for an hour? The pool sometimes mines 15 blocks per hour and sometimes only
Mining alone? What is solo mining and is it profitable?
Fast payments, reliable servers, new block monitoring. Email and Telegram notifications: rig monitoring and new block notifications for all the pools. Free of charge for any amount of rigs. Statistics server is temporarily offline. This doesn't affect the mining process. Mining works fine.
Jared M. Smith, PhD
Gold miners know the difficulty and danger associated with it, but of course, they know what they stand to gain so why not take the risk. Just like gold, cryptocurrencies like bitcoin needs to be mined in other to be available in the market. Mining of cryptocurrency may have its challenges, but the thought of owning a bitcoin is enough to make you go ahead. Even though the price of bitcoin is a volatile one, you are still guaranteed a fair price by the time you are ready to sell off your coin. Right now 17 million bitcoin have currently been mined. With a total supply of 21 million bitcoins, there are only 4 million bitcoins left to be mined. In mining, there are two kinds of operation that a miner might want to consider, the pool mining and solo mining. Solo mining implies mining independently.
Mining Monero : Which Is Better: Solo Mining or Pool Mining Monero?
How to connect? Select type:. Go there. Cuckatoo
By contributing their hashrate to a mining pool, a mining farm can earn a consistent payout every day. Mining is one of the most fascinating aspects of the Bitcoin and proof-of-work cryptocurrency world, but also one of the most mysterious. Mining pools play a key role in helping miners from all over the world mine Bitcoin blocks, and with this article, we are going to explore how mining pools work and why they are important. Mining is the backbone of any proof-of-work blockchain and it can be described with three interconnected concepts:. This process repeats approximately every 10 minutes for every mining machine on the network.
Bitcoin Info 08 Jul 4. Mining has been a highly discussed type of earnings in the cryptocurrency industry in the last couple of years. This concept includes not one or even two types of coin mining. In this article we will talk about SOLO mining, learn about its strengths and weaknesses, and also understand whether it is worth doing. Contents: please, click the topic to scroll down to it What is solo mining? Advantages and disadvantages of this type of mining What is better: solo or a pool? Conclusion 1.
Last reward. Zano is the development of a scalable and secure coin, designed for use in e-commerce. The technology behind our blockchain provides reliability, security, and flexibility—a perfect option for P2P transactions.
There are no comments yet.