Just translating p2pool as it exists into C, C++, C#, Objective C, Swift, Java, Perl, Lisp, whatever, is not going to suddenly bring the mining masses here. I know a number of us have listed out the problems previously, and a number of us have had discussions on potential solutions to those problems; however, nobody has been able to successfully crack the nut. Maybe the problem is that we're all trying to solve p2pool's problems while keeping ourselves in the context of the existing structure. Let's try another approach. Forget p2pool even exists. We as a community want a new pool to be created. Here is a list of high-level bullet points we would want to have in our new pool: - Decentralized
- Easy to use
- Performant
- Scalable
- Inclusive
Please feel free to add to these points and/or provide more details/solutions. This is exactly what I'm suggesting JB - a complete re-write. But in order to achieve this I think we should do the donation bounty option from within the current p2pool structure, as it's (I think) an excellent way of raising awareness in the community as well as raising funds, while the amount of work involved in making the changes are minimal & simple. To accomplish that, we'll need somebody to fork the p2pool code and change the donation function to point to a community agreed upon address. Then we'll need everyone to download and use that new fork, in addition to every node starting up with donations set - assuming we keep it the same and make the donation optional. So... 1) Who wants to fork the code and write? 2) Who do we make the keepers of the honey pot? |
|
|
|
Just translating p2pool as it exists into C, C++, C#, Objective C, Swift, Java, Perl, Lisp, whatever, is not going to suddenly bring the mining masses here. I know a number of us have listed out the problems previously, and a number of us have had discussions on potential solutions to those problems; however, nobody has been able to successfully crack the nut. Maybe the problem is that we're all trying to solve p2pool's problems while keeping ourselves in the context of the existing structure. Let's try another approach. Forget p2pool even exists. We as a community want a new pool to be created. Here is a list of high-level bullet points we would want to have in our new pool: - Decentralized
- Easy to use
- Performant
- Scalable
- Inclusive
Please feel free to add to these points and/or provide more details/solutions. |
|
|
|
|
Yet another week has passed. P2Pool started off strong, but has stalled for the past 3.5 days. Luck shows just over 100% for the past 7 days. Here are this week's results:
2/20 - 2/27
NastyPoP - 0.03798674BTC
NastyP2P - 0.04202049BTC
Expected - 0.0338BTC
Luck - 100.64%
Updated the OP
|
|
|
|
So what happened to the good old days of trying to have a real p2ppool??? Is the p2ppool Bitmain dream dead and we are back to the typical centralized and fee-based stuff as usual??
With so much money and great team and opportunity to do justice to Bitcoin why give up??
There is a real P2Pool, we are mining away, Bitmain simply chose not to participate in it. They chose to participate in it... realized they didn't have the proper resources or understanding to deal with and solve the underlying issues... and never bothered to update the thread or their pool to remove references to "pushing forward decentralization" as they've grown to be the second largest centralized pool out there. |
|
|
|
I'm in the same boat. I am getting tired of these super long times between blocks/ low #s of blocks per day. I was thinking about trying out a local p2pool. Haven't made up my mind yet.
If you don't like variance, p2pool is most certainly not for you. |
|
|
|
I'm 100% on board for getting this done, and managing the bounty if you folks want, but this is not a small task....
We would need to define the criteria for success, i.e. what constitutes "fixing it" first.
Maintaining P2Pool's decentralized and trust-less nature would be one of my top priorities.
Keeping things trust-less and decentralized while increasing pool hash rate, decreasing variance and including regular payouts for small miners is not an easy problem to solve.
I'm open to any ideas, but until one of us bumps our head in the shower and comes up with a theoretically working solution I would not know how to proceed...
Pretty sure I've bumped my head a few times too many  |
|
|
|
 I'm new to the p2pool'ers. I've got a Windows Server 2012 r2 VPS, and have sucsessfully installed a btc p2pool. What are the things i have to do that i merge mine Namecoin? I allready installed, synced and have a Running Namecoin Wallet/Node ... Thx  Check out the p2pool merged mining thread for more details, but in a nutshell, when you start your p2pool node, you tell it you're merge mining like this: run_p2pool.py --merged http://USERNAME:PASSWORD@IP_ADDRESS:PORT
USERNAME - corresponds to rpcuser in *coin.conf PASSWORD - corresponds to rpcpassword in *coin.conf IP_ADDRESS - the IP address of the machine running the coin daemon PORT - corresponds to rpcport in *coin.conf |
|
|
|
mining since mid 2013 and i have finally found a block Yeah
On this pool? I'm pretty sure this pool hasn't been around that long |
|
|
|
Another block... hooray!
Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid. TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add
0.00681057BTC
I just moved a couple more miners back and was thinking of renting some again.  I wish this had happened a few weeks ago when I was pushing 200-400TH/s of rented gear onto p2pool... slowly building the wallet balance back up, though. |
|
|
|
|
Another block... hooray!
Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid. TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add
0.00681057BTC
|
|
|
|
For the folks that have their payouts coming every 2 hours... do you have a pretty significant amount of hash? Currently you're only going to get 0.0008975BTC per TH. Seems like you're going to get hammered by transaction fees when you ever try to spend those coins because of the combination of so many inputs.
When I have spent coin I have not noticed a problem yet. It use to be when I first started about 2 years ago on Slush I had my payout set at .25 but as difficulty keeps going up I think you will see more miners taking smaller payments. Maybe I'm missing something... is there a minimum payout threshold you can set or is it only the time-based one? Since 1TH/s expects to earn 0.01077 BTC a day right now, that means breaking that payment into 12 pieces - so you get your payments every 2 hours - gets you the number from my post you quoted. At the end of the day, sure you've got the same total number of coins, but the inputs to get there are 12 times more. More inputs, the larger the size of the data in your transaction. The larger the data, the more you pay out in transaction fees. No your right as its time base a miners chooses. I knew the transaction fees are higher if you have a lot of inputs to make up the coin your spending but so far the coins I have spent I really have not notice a high fee yet? I guess I am not sure what is normal or what is high? The typical fee that is sent along with a transaction is 0.0001 BTC per kilobyte of data. As you add more and more inputs to the transaction, the size of the payload goes up, and you pay fees accordingly. To see the effect, use manual coin control on you wallet and play around using different inputs to send coins. You'll quickly see that lots of small value inputs will add up to larger fees. Given our example here, if you get paid every 2 hours, you're going to have 12 inputs into a send transaction of 0.01 BTC. If you get paid every 24 hours, that same transaction is a single input. |
|
|
|
Please allow me to expand my question, do I need to open any specific ports for cgminer to talk to ckpool.org? Thanks for helping a noob.
No you do not. You are having some other kind of trouble, and it is not really clear what that trouble is. I opened TCP port 3333 to outgoing traffic on my firewall and PRESTO, I'm mining! Thank you so much to everyone who answered my questions. You restrict outgoing traffic? Ok... that's unusual but perhaps windows needs all the security help it can get so I guess it does that by default and I didn't predict it. Yea, I have the firewall on my router set up pretty aggressively I guess, nothing that windows did by default, it's how I have the hardware configured, call me paranoid. Now to figure out how to mine with more than once device at a time. Baby steps... They all go out to port 3333 (unless you specify otherwise) so there shouldn't need to be any more router changes at least I would think. Unless you allowed only that first machine to use that TCP Port. If your mining from a second machine you may need to add another rule allowing the second IP to use that port too. Or setup a proxy internally and point all the miners on the internal network to that proxy box, then only the proxy needs to speak to the outside world. Pretty sure I've seen reference to something called ckproxy around here somewhere |
|
|
|
For the folks that have their payouts coming every 2 hours... do you have a pretty significant amount of hash? Currently you're only going to get 0.0008975BTC per TH. Seems like you're going to get hammered by transaction fees when you ever try to spend those coins because of the combination of so many inputs.
When I have spent coin I have not noticed a problem yet. It use to be when I first started about 2 years ago on Slush I had my payout set at .25 but as difficulty keeps going up I think you will see more miners taking smaller payments. Maybe I'm missing something... is there a minimum payout threshold you can set or is it only the time-based one? Since 1TH/s expects to earn 0.01077 BTC a day right now, that means breaking that payment into 12 pieces - so you get your payments every 2 hours - gets you the number from my post you quoted. At the end of the day, sure you've got the same total number of coins, but the inputs to get there are 12 times more. More inputs, the larger the size of the data in your transaction. The larger the data, the more you pay out in transaction fees. |
|
|
|
|
For the folks that have their payouts coming every 2 hours... do you have a pretty significant amount of hash? Currently you're only going to get 0.0008975BTC per TH. Seems like you're going to get hammered by transaction fees when you ever try to spend those coins because of the combination of so many inputs.
|
|
|
|
Ahhhh.... That makes sense. No problem. When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.
Thanks. I was kinda kidding.. kinda... Sent. TxID: ae4ed57e199a5bfe7340fc8cca987e7b81cdc689252578366ac107ae88619e66 |
|
|
|
p2pool first and foremost - even though the last couple weeks have been painful MRR - because I can put my rigs on there, charge a price that's better than I would earn on PPS... and have the ability to remotely configure my miners when I travel for work. Yes, it's the lazy way to get remote access . kano - because he and CK have done so much for this community solo.ckpool - why not try to win the lottery? |
|
|
|
What criteria are you using for ranking the pools? It looks like you're just showing which pool solved the most blocks. Does your blog post and/or the chart imply that because Discus Fish solved the most blocks in January, then they are the highest ranked pool? Also, you've seen organofcorti's post on weekly pool statistics here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.0 haven't you? Thanks for any clarifications. |
|
|
|
|
Ahhhh.... That makes sense. No problem. When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.
|
|
|
|
Alright... I've never seen this before. Can somebody explain this from my logs: 2015-02-21 14:34:39.585148 Local: 46102GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~7.3% (5-10%) Expected time to share: 29.7 minutes
2015-02-21 14:34:39.585209 Shares: 136 (7 orphan, 12 dead) Stale rate: ~14.0% (9-21%) Efficiency: ~100.4% (92-107%) Current payout: 0.0000 BTC
2015-02-21 14:34:39.585311 Pool: 1025TH/s Stale rate: 14.3% Expected time to block: 2.2 days
2015-02-21 14:34:40.883225 Peer sent entire transaction bf60e45e409ed34fb9fc66c168f523c86573389cd036d762213944e2af0f25a8 that was already received
2015-02-21 14:34:42.635166 GOT SHARE! 1DeVLDoGvkbbB5n3dPvbpDbwiKGjYckCy9 8322ab0e prev 7d9ffbc9 age 86.38s DEAD ON ARRIVAL
2015-02-21 14:34:42.816110 New work for worker! Difficulty: 9881.151697 Share difficulty: 17750679.688090 Total block value: 25.219599 BTC including 1397 transactions
2015-02-21 14:34:42.960120 New work for worker! Difficulty: 500.000000 Share difficulty: 3738875.477555 Total block value: 25.219599 BTC including 1397 transactions
2015-02-21 14:34:43.094841 New work for worker! Difficulty: 256.000000 Share difficulty: 17750679.688090 Total block value: 25.219599 BTC including 1397 transactions
2015-02-21 14:34:43.240753 New work for worker! Difficulty: 9881.151697 Share difficulty: 17750679.688090 Total block value: 25.219599 BTC including 1397 transactions
2015-02-21 14:34:43.407120 P2Pool: 17397 shares in chain (17401 verified/17401 total) Peers: 20 (13 incoming)
2015-02-21 14:34:43.407407 Local: 46412GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~7.6% (5-10%) Expected time to share: 29.6 minutes
2015-02-21 14:34:43.407553 Shares: 137 (7 orphan, 12 dead) Stale rate: ~13.9% (9-21%) Efficiency: ~100.5% (92-107%) Current payout: 0.0076 BTC
2015-02-21 14:34:43.407703 Pool: 1040TH/s Stale rate: 14.3% Expected time to block: 2.1 days
Specifically, I'm looking for an explanation as to why my node is suddenly reporting a payout to the node's payout address. I have 0% fees. The only miner on my node is my own (some of my own gear, plus some rentals). All of the rigs, owned and rented are set to mine to the same BTC address. So, why do I suddenly have a payout going to my node's payout address??? EDIT: aurel57, take a look at the workers. Notice the one that has difficulty of 500 and share difficulty of 3738875? That's an S3 that I have set as "ADDRESS+500/500". The others are the rentals. One has "ADDRESS+256". The others just have "ADDRESS". You can see the effects of using the "+" and "/" clearly here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
