That’s on my end and it only impacts the end of month estimate. I forgot that I made some effort to make the estimate more accurate in the top overview, but didn’t put in the same effort on the bottom. Working on a fix.
In short, the top overview calculates average disk use over the time that has been reported back to the node and extrapolates to a month. While the bottom one assumes all disk usage has been reported already up until the current second. The top one is more accurate. I’ll fix the bottom row to match this.
However, this is unrelated to the new payouts and the lack of updates in the pricing.db database. Which should be in effect as of today according to the top post.
As per LittleSkunk, the pricing database probably won’t change until they perform the payout calculations for the previous month. Once that is done, and the new pricing is updated, you’ll probably need to restart your node so it fetches the new pricing.
These payout reductions have barely gone into effect and only impact test satellites. Even if node operators exit those, you won’t see that effect reflected in these stats as they are still on other satellites. Its way too early to draw any conclusions.
I disagree. A cautious SNO would be postponing decisions and adopting a wait and see attitude knowing what was coming down the line. At the moment we are still getting more nodes coming on line.
New node operators have little way of even knowing about these changes. Dashboards don’t show the updates payout rates yet and they wouldn’t have received the email notification. also the node version that includes the info message regarding payout changes was stopped from rolling out further due to CLI dashboard issues.
That wait and see approach also works both ways. Why stop nodes or exit satellites if there has literally been no impact on payout yet? Most node operators have no idea yet what this will mean for them. Only those frequenting the forums will have some idea about what’s coming. I’d say we need at least 2 more payout cycles to have some idea of the impact.
This does not take updated payout rates into account yet. And to be honest, ATM you won’t even notice that difference as the satellites that will lower egress pay currently barely have any egress to begin with. The differences you’re seeing are a result of different traffic patterns on the network. (I personally don’t see anything close to the drop you are describing either)
Please read again the first post in this thread where the reason for the different pricing is explainedl, specifically, the answer to this question:
What is the proposed path forward with SNO payments?
TL;DR - this is a test where we will evaluate which egress pricing is agreeable to node operators, and we will base our decision about the future price point for production satellites on the results.
The reduction in payout for me is 100% due to an extreme decrease in egress on the us1 satellite. So some customer who had high egress so far probably stopped downloading their data. It has nothing to do with the price changes as us1 has only real customers as far as I am aware. For me, egress from us1 was 25% of the march traffic in april.
