Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ticker EVER #1978

Open
keynobase opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Ticker EVER #1978

keynobase opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 0 comments

Comments

@keynobase
Copy link
Contributor

keynobase commented Feb 18, 2020

HI,

I has 2 pools at my ticker EVER. I only use one, the second is closed.

The STOPPED and old pool is this one : 47902d91eddfb1794ed075d1a54d764f6b2f70800bc3d83f7608388a110a6f10.
This pool has 0 ADAs as controlled stake. Pools margin 50%. 500 ADAs as cost per epoch.

The STARTED and new pood is this one : d7ad46b7628f6d6f86a3a439d3e5e3097e79e753cbce06061f28c3346f29648e
This pool has 64.000 ADAs as controlled stake. Pools margin 5%. 0 ADAs as cost per epoch.

Is obvious that the started pool has best conditions than the closesd. Rigth now my pool is started from 3 days, 13 Hours (uptime: 305952), and also this pool has created one block.

The problem is that Daedalus put the stopped pool before than the started. The rankig is this one :

Stopped, 47902d91eddfb1794ed075d1a54d764f6b2f70800bc3d83f7608388a110a6f10., rank 437
Started, d7ad46b7628f6d6f86a3a439d3e5e3097e79e753cbce06061f28c3346f29648e, rank 820

My question is why daelaus evaluate better my stopped pool if it has the worst parameters ?

Thanks,

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant