Multiple mining pool workers or just one

Question

I asked a question about What is a worker exactly from Antminer Pool Worker field and got an answer to one of the specific questions within stating that you can generally use a worker name over and over on different machines, and all the work is added together to show the worker's work.

Question

What factors should be considered for someone trying to decide whether to have a worker setup and dedicated to each individual miner device versus having one worker setup for multiple miner devices?

It would seem from a server farm administration perspective at least that managing less workers could help simplify some of the configuration and tracking tasks.

I'm worried doing this one way versus the other could have a negative impact on the ultimate goal to make more money than spent on the electric utility if there's anything applicable that'd affect this.

Answer 1

Multiple mining pool workers or just one?

It would seem from a server farm administration perspective at least that managing less workers could help simplify some of the configuration and tracking tasks.

The initial task of configuring the pool and miners is certainly simpler with just one worker name, however, the overall job of administration is made more complex by using that method.

By using a separate worker name for each physical miner (even if you enter it three times, once for each pool in the miner configuration) your job of monitoring is simplified since you can then just check on your pool to see that each miner is performing as expected. Some pools even have alerts if a particular worker's performance drops below a threshold.

By using a separate worker name for each miner you can easily identify a) that there is an issue, and b) which miner has the issue.

You could even label the worker name on each miner to simplify this further.