Open roycewilliams opened 1 year ago
I guess you would not really want to have graphs for specific agents, but more for a group of users? Or would you really want a graph for a specific user?
Because I guess you are trying to show how many hashes were found by a group of users?
I was thinking more of raw computational hashing rate, not successful cracking rate. For example, if 8 or 10 different people are all contributing compute, even if there are no cracks at all, the total hash rate might be 400 MH/s, and 60 MH/s of that might be 3 systems belonging to User 1, and 50MH/s might be 2 systems belonging to User 2, etc. In other words, it would show how much of the total compute power is being contributed by each user. One value of this would be to create interest / competition among the participants, so they can see which people are contributing the most compute, etc.
Rough example, though showing percentages per user, and total hashrate at the bottom, would probably also be nice.
In the real world, "unassigned" would also need to be a category.
This would require adding the relating between individual users 'owning' agents? Because a single user can have multiple agents.
Yes, this would require the math to add all hashrates for clients working on a specific task that also are owned by a specific user. It is understood that this would change rapidly (just like the other info on the per-task page), but could be summarized dynamically with each page load.
When a large collaboration is happening, it would be useful for one or more graphs to show what percentage of total hashrate for a task is from agents managed by specific users. A pie chart might work well.