So I have been taking a close look at p2pool lately (for my own peace of mind if nothing else).
Shouldn't p2pool node report all DOA as rejected back to the miner.
Across my entire farm cgminer shows ~ 1.5% reject rate ("R" in cgminer). p2pool shows ~2.5% DOA rate.
My assumptions is the logic flow is something like this
1) miner requests work (getwork).
2) p2pool provides work.
3) miner returns low diff shares (I have mine set to a static diff 1).
4) p2pool verifies share
a) if share is DOA it increments DOA count by one, and sends reject notification to iminer
b) if share is > share diff and not dead it submits it to all peers for inclusion in share chain and sends accept notification to miner
c) if share is > block diff it submits it to bitcoin network and sends accept notification to miner
So why doesn't DOA % match reject % in cgminer?
You do mean the dead on arrival pseudoshare rate, not the dead share rate, right? The dead on arrival rate should match cgminer's, but the one displayed on the console is only averaged over 10 minutes. Did you look at the graphs to get a more accurate rate? (area of local dead/area of local total) |
|
|
|
Sure, if p2pool could scale infinitely. But there are a few things that would have to be resolved before we could get that kind of scalability.
Huh? P2Pool would continue to work if one DeepBit-equivalent of miners joined. Variance would just go up. P2Pool adjusts the share difficulty to keep traffic/CPU usage constant. |
|
|
|
That's why I was saying that if it was a P2Pool it has been modified.
The 2 reasons for thinking it is something like P2Pool are that every block (that I looked at) comes from a different IP address and it uses the coinbase payments.
The fact that they are generating bad blocks (including a bad txn) means of course that they are running non-upgraded bitcoind's
Anyway, I guess if no one reading here knows about it, it can't be helped.
Pity it's wasting even a small amount of hashing power (a bit more that a block a week)
I believe that they're BitPenny blocks - they were discussed in IRC yesterday. |
|
|
|
The address getting the largest (now failed) payments is: 1FcTuPJzdekvzTyQ5dXsnsVyT4F5G1tCjc
If it is P2Pool though, it's slightly modified
(it doesn't have the 0 BTC payment tacked on the end of all P2Pool coinbase txn's - but I wonder if it is documented anywhere what that actually is?)
They can't be P2Pool blocks - the 0 output at the end is essential to P2Pool's operation. It links P2Pool's internal data for a particular share to the block that share would have mined. (The other alternative is sticking it in the coinbase, but the coinbase of the block that I looked at is nearly empty.) |
|
|
|
This build just will not start for me using 0.54 or 0.6 (upgrading from the most recent p2pool).
It opens, does nothing for ~20 seconds, then closes itself again, no error produced.
What version of Windows are you using? |
|
|
|
I just noticed a very high amount of stales (50+%) since today 11AM GMT. My p2pool node doesn't show any sign of trouble (cpu, memory, disk and network are OK). All the miners connected to it seem to have trouble, see : http://linode.bouton.name:9332/static/graphs.htmlThe node runs current git master. Is anyone seeing similar behavior ? If you zoom in to the hour view, it looks like it alternates between 100% DOA and normal levels. Maybe someone is attacking your node? Blocking port 9332 and restarting P2Pool would let you test that. I'm mining on your node for testing, though, and I didn't notice any more rejected shares during one of those periods. I would look more at the mining rigs, especially "rig". ((EDIT) Since the miners besides "adsl" and "rig" aren't getting any rejects at all.) |
|
|
|
p2pool randomly freezes up (freezing my Mac for about ~10 seconds) every half an hour or so. Any idea what's causing this? Should I use a different version of python? 2012-04-11 07:47:16.501037 > Watchdog timer went off at:
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501107 > File "run_p2pool.py", line 5, in <module>
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501141 > main.run()
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501172 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/main.py", line 1005, in run
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501203 > reactor.run()
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501234 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/base.py", line 1169, in run
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501267 > self.mainLoop()
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501297 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/base.py", line 1178, in mainLoop
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501331 > self.runUntilCurrent()
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501361 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/base.py", line 800, in runUntilCurrent
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501394 > call.func(*call.args, **call.kw)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501424 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 368, in callback
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501456 > self._startRunCallbacks(result)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501487 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 464, in _startRunCallbacks
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501520 > self._runCallbacks()
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501550 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 551, in _runCallbacks
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501583 > current.result = callback(current.result, *args, **kw)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501614 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1101, in gotResult
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501647 > _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501677 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Twisted-12.0.0-py2.7-macosx-10.5-intel.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1045, in _inlineCallbacks
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501710 > result = g.send(result)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501740 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/main.py", line 799, in status_thread
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501770 > print this_str
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501799 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/util/logging.py", line 81, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501830 > self.inner_file.write(data)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501860 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/util/logging.py", line 69, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501891 > self.inner_file.write('%s %s\n' % (datetime.datetime.now(), line))
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501921 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/util/logging.py", line 55, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501951 > output.write(data)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.501981 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/util/logging.py", line 46, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.502011 > self.inner_file.write(data)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.502041 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/codecs.py", line 691, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.502073 > return self.writer.write(data)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.502103 > File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/codecs.py", line 352, in write
2012-04-11 07:47:16.502134 > self.stream.write(data)
2012-04-11 07:47:16.558924 > File "/Users/christian/p2pool/p2pool/main.py", line 702, in <lambda>
2012-04-11 07:47:16.559463 > sys.stderr.write, 'Watchdog timer went off at:\n' + ''.join(traceback.format_stack())
It looks like it's getting stuck for a while writing something to the log file. Is it possible that your computer went to sleep and woke up? Is P2Pool's folder on a slow disk (network share, etc)? |
|
|
|
Any plans to implement merged mining on P2Pool?
First, P2Pool has long supported solo merged mining. However, as for pooled merged mining... Merged mining, as it exists, can not efficiently be implemented because every share would need to include the full generation transaction from the parent chain. However, P2Pool's generation transaction is pretty large, and so would increase the size of P2Pool shares by more than an order of magnitude (along with P2Pool's network usage). There are a few solutions: compute main-P2Pool's generation transaction instead of redundantly storing nearly the same thing over and over. Alternatively, change the merged mining spec to not require storing the entire parent gentx. I don't like the first because it would be very complex and tie the MM-P2Pool to the main-P2Pool. The second is obviously impractical in the short term. Anyone else have ideas? |
|
|
|
|
Yes, there have been quite a few additions to the web interface that expose more data.
|
|
|
|
|
There's something like that right now - GET / redirects to /static, which has a html page that links to some of the exposed interfaces.
|
|
|
|
I've updated v0.10.3,run it and shows errors:
p2pool.util.jsonrpc.error:-12 error:keypool ran out,please call keypoolrefill first
error getting payout address from bitcoind:
traceback (most recent call last):
My bitcoin-qt is v0.6.0.6 and os is win7 x64
What is the matter?
The problem is due to you using an encrypted wallet, which is locked. The easiest solution would be to run p2pool with the -a option, with a payment address. |
|
|
|
|
That was a bug; if you pull again (as of a couple of hours ago) it will work again. No data was lost, just the graph displaying was broken.
|
|
|
|
|
How exactly did you compute that? That confidence interval is much tinier than is possible... From my simulations this outcome is clearly within the 95% confidence interval.
|
|
|
|
|
Most updates have had 2-3 weeks, but this one was on the short side because it had to mesh with the BIP16 deadline, which was only announced days before I released 0.10.3.
|
|
|
|
I forward the port and use ddns
Many thanks, but can you explain how to do this in windows 7? Panda Mouse. It should be as simple as forwarding port 9332 through your router to your computer and then going to http://YOUR.IP.ADDR.ESS:9332/static from outside. |
|
|
|
The switch-over happened about an hour ago, and we lost about 10% of our hash rate, for the time being. In the future, the P2Pool software will display a large warning when another change like this is going to happen in the future. In addition, if you don't know about it, there's this mailing list that I post important announcements to: http://groups.google.com/group/p2pool-notificationsYay, now we have P2SH! Is there any interest in P2Pool allowing P2SH payouts? |
|
|
|
Thanks for that! - P2Pool didn't handle resubmittal of a share solution well. Fixed in commit d3c794ac7. |
|
|
|
|
I'd like to.
Fizzgig: On Windows, all you need for p2pool is the py2exe binary I distribute. Have you ever had CGminer working before?
|
|
|
|
...
Bitcoin 0.6.0 was released today, so there is no longer any reason to wait to upgrade. Please help by telling anyone that you know that hasn't upgraded to do so. Thanks!
...
Is that a Bitcoin requirement or a P2Pool requirement? (and are there any issues with following your recommendation to upgrade to 0.6.0?) It's a requirement for Bitcoin if you're mining and an absolute requirement for P2Pool. I don't think there are any problems with upgrading. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
