Mining Burst coins?

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
nkw

nkw

Active Member
Aug 28, 2017
136
48
28
I think proof of storage/capacity/space coins are really interesting and address some of the energy efficiency criticisms of Bitcoin, but Burstcoin seems like a dumpster fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: funkywizard and MiniKnight
bash

bash

Active Member
Dec 14, 2015
131
61
28
42
scottsdale
Burstcoin Mining Calculator

If that is to be believed then you would have to have a lot of spare space to make it worthwhile.

If I am reading the calculator correctly(i'm probably not) 5TB of space would net you 411 Burst coins/Month. Which at present value is like 24$.
 
J

Joel

Active Member
Jan 30, 2015
856
199
43
42
In exchange for trashing a spinning rust drive. I know that mining in any form is selling your gear in slow motion, but it seems that HDDs aren't worth the effort. I certainly won't be subjecting my spendy 8tb Reds to this torture.

That said, it might be worth it to buy refurb drives for <60day ROI.
 
marcoi

marcoi

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2013
1,533
289
83
Gotha Florida
Joel said:
In exchange for trashing a spinning rust drive. I know that mining in any form is selling your gear in slow motion, but it seems that HDDs aren't worth the effort. I certainly won't be subjecting my spendy 8tb Reds to this torture.

That said, it might be worth it to buy refurb drives for <60day ROI.
Click to expand...
My understanding is it plots the hdd, then reads from it, so it ties up the space while mining but should be torture for the hdd. Maybe I'm wrong?
 
funkywizard

funkywizard

mmm.... bandwidth.
Jan 15, 2017
848
402
63
USA
ioflood.com
marcoi said:
My understanding is it plots the hdd, then reads from it, so it ties up the space while mining but should be torture for the hdd. Maybe I'm wrong?
Click to expand...
Reading up on it, sounds like the "mining" process amounts to reading 1/4096th of the disk space, sequentially, once per block (approximately once every 4 minutes.)

A 1tb drive would be expected to read 250mb of data, which can typically be completed in 2-4 seconds. A 3tb drive would need to read 750mb of data: approximately 5-8 seconds.

Data only has to be written once.

Doesn't seem too hard on the drives to me.

It does seem that the block times are long enough that the drives are idle most of the time, but short enough that you probably can't benefit from having the drives spin down either.
 
J

Joel

Active Member
Jan 30, 2015
856
199
43
42
funkywizard said:
Reading up on it, sounds like the "mining" process amounts to reading 1/4096th of the disk space, sequentially, once per block (approximately once every 4 minutes.)

A 1tb drive would be expected to read 250mb of data, which can typically be completed in 2-4 seconds. A 3tb drive would need to read 750mb of data: approximately 5-8 seconds.

Data only has to be written once.

Doesn't seem too hard on the drives to me.

It does seem that the block times are long enough that the drives are idle most of the time, but short enough that you probably can't benefit from having the drives spin down either.
Click to expand...
I read about this as well and it sounds like you're right. Might be worth looking into.

Aside: spinning down is actually harder on drives. The only benefit is saving juice.
 
X

xibo

New Member
Dec 25, 2017
13
5
3
39
funkywizard said:
Reading up on it, sounds like the "mining" process amounts to reading 1/4096th of the disk space, sequentially, once per block (approximately once every 4 minutes.)

A 1tb drive would be expected to read 250mb of data, which can typically be completed in 2-4 seconds. A 3tb drive would need to read 750mb of data: approximately 5-8 seconds.

Data only has to be written once.

Doesn't seem too hard on the drives to me.

It does seem that the block times are long enough that the drives are idle most of the time, but short enough that you probably can't benefit from having the drives spin down either.
Click to expand...
If the HDDs spindle up and down every 4 minutes because that's all you use them for, most WD green disks won't live to see their ROI. "Higher quality" storage might live longer but nevertheless that usage pattern kills your disk alot faster than permanent non-sequencial IO would do.

Once the amount of energy that is needed to properly recycle/decompose a HDD is taken into consideration, I doubt this coin is more energy friendly then the ASIC coins are.

The way funkywizard interprets the mining process, which is the same way I interpret it, strikes the question whether the coin can be mined in a Virtual Machine. A dedicated miner VM could be snapshotted after creating the plot file, and then cloned at virtually no expense per clone, as the clones don't write but only read their storage (clones are copy-on-write on most VM solutions). If that doesn't work out for some reason, iSCSI booting many slaves from a host that provides disk images from it's deduplicated storage might be a trick, too.
 
Last edited:
J

Joel

Active Member
Jan 30, 2015
856
199
43
42
xibo said:
If the HDDs spindle up and down every 4 minutes because that's all you use them for, most WD green disks won't live to see their ROI. "Higher quality" storage might live longer but nevertheless that usage pattern kills your disk alot faster than permanent non-sequencial IO would do.

Once the amount of energy that is needed to properly recycle/decompose a HDD is taken into consideration, I doubt this coin is more energy friendly then the ASIC coins are.

The way funkywizard interprets the mining process, which is the same way I interpret it, strikes the question whether the coin can be mined in a Virtual Machine. A dedicated miner VM could be snapshotted after creating the plot file, and then cloned at virtually no expense per clone, as the clones don't write but only read their storage (clones are copy-on-write on most VM solutions). If that doesn't work out for some reason, iSCSI booting many slaves from a host that provides disk images from it's deduplicated storage might be a trick, too.
Click to expand...
The spin up/spin down cycles are what kill drives, not so much actually running them. Drives intended for servers rarely ever spin down at all. Uses more power, sure, but the drive will last 40k+ hours that way (5+ years nonstop). Agree that WD Greens won't last long though there are firmware mods available for them to disable the auto spind0wn (also a good idea for ZFS arrays).
 
marcoi

marcoi

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2013
1,533
289
83
Gotha Florida
i put two WD Reds 8TB drives (from BB easystore) into Raid 0 on my freenas sever. Then NFS it over to ESXI and attached it to windows 10 vm im running burst wallet on. setting it up now. lets see what happens
 
  • Like
Reactions: nkw and Joel
funkywizard

funkywizard

mmm.... bandwidth.
Jan 15, 2017
848
402
63
USA
ioflood.com
xibo said:
If the HDDs spindle up and down every 4 minutes because that's all you use them for, most WD green disks won't live to see their ROI. "Higher quality" storage might live longer but nevertheless that usage pattern kills your disk alot faster than permanent non-sequencial IO would do.

Once the amount of energy that is needed to properly recycle/decompose a HDD is taken into consideration, I doubt this coin is more energy friendly then the ASIC coins are.

The way funkywizard interprets the mining process, which is the same way I interpret it, strikes the question whether the coin can be mined in a Virtual Machine. A dedicated miner VM could be snapshotted after creating the plot file, and then cloned at virtually no expense per clone, as the clones don't write but only read their storage (clones are copy-on-write on most VM solutions). If that doesn't work out for some reason, iSCSI booting many slaves from a host that provides disk images from it's deduplicated storage might be a trick, too.
Click to expand...
The plot files need to be different or it doesn't help your "hash rate". Think of it like password cracking: 2 copies of the same dictionary file doesn't improve your odds of success.
 
funkywizard

funkywizard

mmm.... bandwidth.
Jan 15, 2017
848
402
63
USA
ioflood.com
Joel said:
The spin up/spin down cycles are what kill drives, not so much actually running them. Drives intended for servers rarely ever spin down at all. Uses more power, sure, but the drive will last 40k+ hours that way (5+ years nonstop). Agree that WD Greens won't last long though there are firmware mods available for them to disable the auto spind0wn (also a good idea for ZFS arrays).
Click to expand...
I agree you'd want to avoid spinning down. If you could avoid accessing a drive more than once every couple hours, spin down might be a viable way to cut costs. But at 4 minutes, better to have them stay spun up all the time.

If you can't force the drives to stay spun up in firmware, could always arbitrarily sync-write to each disk a small amount once every few seconds.
 
J

Joel

Active Member
Jan 30, 2015
856
199
43
42
So I have no idea what variables I should plug in to the calculator aside from storage size. How much $$/mo should I expect to make per 1tb storage?
 
P

pyro_

Active Member
Oct 4, 2013
747
165
43
There is a good size thread over on hardforum in their crypto mining section which might have some of the details you guys are looking for
 
marcoi

marcoi

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2013
1,533
289
83
Gotha Florida
ok so i downloaded the Qbundle wallet and the blockchain file. after importing it, it created a 19 gb database file.
Next is setting up the plotter.
 
marcoi

marcoi

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2013
1,533
289
83
Gotha Florida
creating plots now.
Not sure if the rates are good or not. but it only writes data to the drive for a few mins. I set the memory and thread high to see how fast it goes.

Next is mining, trying solo first.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom