Why such a difference in the statistics and the client at all times?
Because what you see as your hashing rate is an estimate based on a random process. Any time you see a hash rate other than directly from your mining software, you need to read it as "the amount of work that another person would have to do to have a good change of duplicating my work" not as "the amount of work I've done". |
|
|
|
kjj. no I am not a troll (but I would say that) I want to see BTC succeed so if I see an attempt to bring BTC under control of any kind of authority I argue against that (at length) If I see censorship of free speech I argue against that (at length). I mine, I trade, I read the forum to keep up to date. Thats it. reg.
Ok, but how does that relate to the two earlier posts? |
|
|
|
|
Is this some new form of trolling, too subtle for me to comprehend?
|
|
|
|
Why does p2pool currently show "current payout: 0.0000 BTC"? Seems a little low...
Have you found any shares in the last 24 hours? |
|
|
|
Edit: I should add - that when there's an orphan battle, who do you think will win?
A solo P2Pool bitcoind with 8 connections or BTC Guild's bitcoind with ? connections?
If they post them very closely together the winner is usually the one with the most connections and the fastest internet.
Edit2: and if you look at the 2 block hashes, the BTC Guild one is not the one with the harder difficulty either.
000000000000079f7e918f3fba8f758383e1061c5d4eb8b3742612dedc23c00e P2P
0000000000000c163ce8827e37bb459161e6978dc1ff0c052c53dd7f5858608a BTCG
Unfortunately, P2Pool did have an orphan block. However, P2Pool is not at a disadvantage to other pools. P2Pool not only passes block solutions to the local bitcoind, but also passes them to other P2Pool nodes so that they can spread faster. In theory P2Pool should be better for this reason. I've been working on this a bit, because right now stale shares aren't passed around, and that might have contributed to this being an orphan. ... Actually that would only make a difference if bitcoind accepted network blocks from p2pool ... Bitcoind accepts non-self-generated blocks from the network only. How does that work with p2pool? Does p2pool pretend to be another bitcoind and tell the bitcoind about the block whenever it receives a block difficulty share? Edit: which would mean the p2pool would have to be one of the 8 (or more) constant connections to the local bitcoind. Edit2: and p2pool would have to deal with all the normal network traffic that bitcoind handles ...] Edit3: OK, looks like I'm wrong  Maybe you can do it with getmemorypool ... is that how you do it? Can you feed an new network block into the bitcoind with getmemorypool? (I've never gone near that command due to the merged-mining implications it created) If that's the method, then that would put it back to comparing the network speed of bitcoind's block-chain versus p2pool's share-chain+rpc to bitcoind. Got any info to decide one way of the other? Yes, p2pool does make a regular p2p connection to your local bitcoind and pretend to be just another node. It also makes a RPC connection. And it uses them for different things. If your local miners find a block, your local p2pool will return that block to the local bitcoind using RPC calls. It will also spread that block to all of it's p2pool peers, which will then relay it to their local bitcoind using the ordinary bitcoin p2p protocol. In other words, a block found by p2pool will spread through two different networks. |
|
|
|
|
As far as I know, no one has ever demonstrated an actual advantage of a sliding window, but quite a few sliding window system have been found to be exploitable.
|
|
|
|
|
If they are paying fees now, wouldn't switching to a negative fee pool like p2pool be reward enough?
|
|
|
|
Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?
Thanks!
You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet). The merged mining still needs some work. The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s). Is that an ok workaround? Thank you! I use a script to sweep any earnings into a different address. It isn't a great solution, but it works. |
|
|
|
This exact same thread shows up every time the exchange rate or the block rate changes, and lots of times when neither does. There is no such thing as The Hash Rate. It isn't measured. It isn't calculated. It isn't real. Your piddly little CPU could calculate two valid hashes in a row, but that doesn't mean that you got a temporary 5 petahash/sec upgrade. Whenever you see a graph claiming to show a network hash rate, you need to mentally cross out the graph's title, and write in your own: How much work I would have needed to do in the past to have a good chance of having generating these blocks myself
Note that this title is 100% past-tense, and that it makes no claims about what really did happen. |
|
|
|
Having a computer behind NAT that doesn't accept incoming connections is like downloading a torrent while blocking its uploads. If nobody took the time to set port forwarding, Bitcoin wouldn't be as responsive.
While miners create transaction blocks, the P2P network does the work of propagating the blocks to other nodes. In addition the transaction messages when someone presses "send coins" are relayed via the p2p network to other nodes (some of which will be miners). If you only have a few connections, you are relying to just a few p2p peers to relay your transactions to others; if you are highly connected, than many more peers get your transactions directly from you. If you complain about slow block downloading, remember the blockchain comes from other peers; if half of the peers are a black hole, it takes longer to download.
It is also possible for bad guys to create bad nodes that do odd things on the p2p network, the more good nodes there are with full connectivity, the better.
As Bitcoin runs on port 8333, you can only forward this port to one computer inside your network. More than one computer running Bitcoin with uPnP, wanting the same port, will likely confuse your router. Additional clients inside your network should connect to your main Bitcoin using the connect=IP.IP.IP.IP config option; they will sync much faster and your bandwidth use will be less.
- 55 active connections to Bitcoin network
Bitcoin does not require any specific port. If you use UPNP, you will likely get a random port assignment, and if you plan to run multiple nodes on a single IP, then you will need to use other ports. It works just fine, and you can get incoming connections regardless of the ports you use or what you have to do to get them. The whole point of having a network is that it isn't necessary to connect to every node. 8 connections is "enough" for just about anyone. More is better, sorta, maybe, a little, but not worth losing sleep over. If you are mining, you would be better off with 8 connections to the 8 biggest pools than you would be with 100 connections to random other nodes. |
|
|
|
to all who are more knowledgeable than me (nearly everyone)
what is the significance- if any- of the hash rate falling to between 8500 and 8000 in the last few days?
The actual hashing rate over the last few days is just as unknown now as it always has been. Don't read much into things until it lasts a week or two. |
|
|
|
|
The flaw is that no one needs to prove what you think they need to prove.
|
|
|
|
Is there any benefits to forwarding port 8333TCP for using the Bitcoin client or will UPnP do just as good. Also if there is a benefit how can you forward the ports for more than one PC on your home network as I can only allocate a port to one device on my router.
UPNP is how software running on your computer talks to your router to establish port forwarding. If UPNP works, you don't need to forward the port manually too. There is no real benefit to you in allowing incoming connections, but the network needs some amount of connectable ports so that new nodes can get online. I don't believe that there is a shortage of incoming ports on the network at the moment, so don't feel too bad if you can't get port forwarding set up. |
|
|
|
If you include p2pool in the default install (or an easy way to set it up after install) Im sure you will get a lot of help from the p2pool people. p2pool's biggest problem is all the steps required to set it up initially. It would be cool to have it all ready to go (miners and pool) in one pre configured package. I would donate to that. Maybe post what you are planning to do on the p2pool thread.
I will be releasing my linuxcoin-based p2pool headless miner USB stick distribution soon. I've been running the prototype since last Thursday. Just need to make it a little more automatic for people. |
|
|
|
|
Yes, but lots of people use it for other things. For example, grep "Mined by BTC Guild" in your blk0001.dat.
Right now, anyone that wants to sign their blocks like that has to use something else to do it (like PoolServerJ), or they have to edit and compile their own node.
I expect that as p2pool grows in popularity, there will be more interest in this sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
I just used importprivkey to import a key, and the whole thing hung up for several minutes. Is that normal?
The import appears to have been successful though.
|
|
|
|
|
I lost 0.5 BTC recently. I was testing a script intended to sweep any balance found in a wallet to a known address for a bootable USB miner project. Sadly, I overwrote the USB stick with the wallet before I got all of the bugs out, so my test amount was lost. Next time, I'll use 0.05 instead.
The problem is that I suspect that the number of actually lost coins dwarfs the number of coins properly reported as lost. But there is no way to know.
|
|
|
|
|
I just did a trivial patch to my local 0.6.0rc1 code to add -addtag to the configuration options. It adds arbitrary text to the COINBASE_FLAGS, exactly like -bip16 does, except provided in the config file or on the command line.
It appears to work. My getmemorypool is showing 062f503253482f055b4b4a4a5d , exactly like it should. I guess we'll know for sure in a month or two, or however long it takes my rigs to find a block.
So, I was wondering if there was a reason it isn't in the main tree. Was it just that no one thought of it, or do we not want to make it easy for people to scribble up the chain?
|
|
|
|
If anyone has lost bitcoins, they could post here with a link to their address.
There is an old thread listing known lost coins. Search for it. |
|
|
|
It could be possible to split the current p2pool pool into multiple sub-pools, all of which work on their respective share chains.
When searching for a block-chain to use, if the share difficulty is too high, the p2pool client attempts to find an another p2pool sub-pool to use which has a lower share difficulty.
+1, you could set-up max and min share diff in settings and p2pool would search a share-chain that meets the condition This seems like such a great idea. p2pool would automatically fragment itself into nodes that had overlapping ranges. The problem is that there is no way to enforce which pool someone should be in. If everyone wants to stay in the 100-400 difficulty pool, the feedback mechanism fails when it hits one of those two numbers, and the share clock breaks. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
