I nixed my LTC pool since nobody used it in like 10 days, but I guess it was never listed anyways. I have a quarkcoin pool up now at nogleg.com:8372, 0% fee, 0% donation. Though not sure if it'd be considered p2pool in the classical sense? It's running as a solo pool |
|
|
|
0% fee, 0% donation (does that address even go to someone?)....
Yep, it's one of mine. Please be sure to read the comments in the source p2pool/data.py (i think around line 50) ... wait, i had that somewhere written already, lets post that, some important thing is marked bold That address is somewhat special, in one of the posts in the Quarkcoin thead here i mentioned that stuff already. I noted my (hopeful correct) findings of it in the source: p2pool/data.py: starting around line 54 ### Neisklar:
### It took a while to figure it out:
### This is a UNCOMPRESSED public key surrounded by 4104 ... ac
### Important is the (clever or not?) way it is used:
### ALL shares in the p2pools chains depend on that value, means if you would like to join a p2pool network with your own node with this value changed
### would invalidate ALL shares. Means your own node would see all shares from the other nodes as invalid, and the p2pool network with the other value would see
### all your shares as invalid. Of course if you run a standalone node as pool, this isn't a problem, as long as you DO NOT change this value after your local node
### has produced some shares without deleting the share database /data/<network>
### Also important: It must be so long, i tried it with newer Script wich includes only the pubkey hash (76a914...(pubkey_hash)...88ac), this will break the pool.
DONATION_SCRIPT = '4104ebc79bbfd3901db557108d9e8815bf13ff2c170a63ff1546a6e6d99ef90004f78b94753ba550e9be681cde100ed84a439103e03290f1d34cf4d7e1c3535d2a93ac'.decode('hex')
So thats an address of me ( Wink), if someone wants to do it (i don't know why) he could run the node with --donate-to-author or somewhat to give that address some share. That param was in the original code even defaulted to 1 percent, i did zero it hopefully in the source. Another important thing is when you look at the stats page under rewards of my pool you see the following:
Qe91rA2W8fQ3b19cknuVuxVhxgqdbkvL4m 0.0002
EVEN as donations to author are set to 0.
This is all what is left after payoutprocessing which has some rounding in it. So with current reward of 1024 thats not so much, but when the reward gows down, that will be much more.So if you want to change that, no problem, you need an uncompressed public key (should be 65 bytes long) and put them between the 4104 and the ac. (It may also that that uncompressed pubkey is already prefixed with 04, then don't double the 04). If we later establish a p2pool network, then this value MUST be the same on all nodes, if not it will not work (clever or not of the original p2pool author?). If the time arrives, lets discuss that together with Max the developer of Quark and then maybe use as Network-Donantion address an address of Max, or some other address which is used for special stuff. Oh, I don't mind, I probably would have put it at 0.2% or so, same as I have the bitcoin pool at.. On another note, the person mining as 'quarkcoinrpc' on my p2pool, that all goes to me... you have to use your address as username. PM me and I can send you what you got... if you can prove who you are.  I did a capture of the IP addresses & the earliest time you got a share, so it narrows the IP range down quite a bit, but you'd have to give me your IP I think for proof (ed: unless there's a better way I can't think of atm... but I can narrow it down to about a half dozen IPs) |
|
|
|
Anyone else getting no accepted shares at all, or fluctuating hash rates?
I don't get it really...tried both solo and pools (all of them) and I can't get this to mine decently since last night.
I used to get a constant 600kh/s but not anymore.
the share difficulty goes up as the pool's (p2pool) hashing power increases so a pool at 100mhash will be 10x harder to get a share on than one at 10mhash and 100x harder than one at 1mhash. that is unless someone changed the settings.. it's designed to adjust difficulty to achieve a set # of shares per minute |
|
|
|
I can't get mine working properly... it's getting some error about 'quark-hash' not being found or some such & not loading headers... just going to take it down instead of leaving that shell up  I had the same problem until I looked around in Neisklar's Github. Git clone this https://github.com/Neisklar/quarkcoin-hash-python , then python setup.py install, then the pool should work. Thanks to everyone testing, seems to run good so far, weirdly my yacpool had some hiccups this morning, investigating. OK, finally fixed that. Don't really want to restart p2pool, though..  It's essentially just cosmetic err, quoted the wrong msg. I meant the wrong hash rates being reported locally... but the correct # on shares =p OK, it's showing the rates (local & pool MH/s) properly now. Just had to restart quarkcoind, not p2pool. 0% fee, 0% donation (does that address even go to someone?).... have had 4 (possibly 5) orphans out of the 50 blocks solved, but I don't think that's too out of the ordinary... to me it looks like it might be less than avg, after seeing all the self orphans on the two "really big" p2pools.... nogleg.com:8372 ... I've been using 3 threads on my server to mine with, too.... guess I'll stop, hah (ed: ok, 5 orphans now out of 52.. 117926 was latest) |
|
|
|
I can't get mine working properly... it's getting some error about 'quark-hash' not being found or some such & not loading headers... just going to take it down instead of leaving that shell up I had the same problem until I looked around in Neisklar's Github. Git clone this https://github.com/Neisklar/quarkcoin-hash-python , then python setup.py install, then the pool should work. Thanks to everyone testing, seems to run good so far, weirdly my yacpool had some hiccups this morning, investigating. OK, finally fixed that. Don't really want to restart p2pool, though.. It's essentially just cosmetic err, quoted the wrong msg. I meant the wrong hash rates being reported locally... but the correct # on shares =p |
|
|
|
I guess I got the late in the game.
Just can't pile Bitcoins with my 5850, and doesn't have money to pay for expensive hardware.
How did you guys manage to pay for all this, that's beyond my comprehension... don't you have a life with bills ?!?!
i started out with a 5830 in 2011 for a while there they paid for themselves in 2 or 3 days |
|
|
|
My firewall blocks everything except 80 and 443, do you know some nodes on these ports?
I found mint.bitminter.com on 192.31.187.114:80 but it doesn't seem to respond...
did you try it w/ their web client? maybe pool80.50btc.com:80 still works? |
|
|
|
Anti-malware software does not make you safer at all. It gives false sense of security and gives false alarms. Not to mention adding additional attack surface area to your system. The security is in proper procedures of computer usage and the skills of computer owner.
agreed pretty much i run a malwarebytes scan once a month or so, that's it... no memory resident crap. the only hits i've gotten on it in the last few years were for barelyclocked (false positive), phoenix rising (false positive), and the new bitcoind/bitcoin-qt that is flagged as a trojan or some such now. wtf are people running/doing to get bitcoin installed on their computers w/o their knowledge anyway? is it mostly javascript? |
|
|
|
I have a question, why is deepbit at 11% of the bitcoin network? the hashrate is very low on the pool site but it shows that deepbit is solving blocks faster than 50btc....
Deepbit doesn't tag any blocks to allow sites to properly identify them. At the time blockchain.info was designed, the vast majority of blocks with no tag did belong to Deepbit [which was 30-40% of the network at the time]. As a result, there is still some legacy code in there that has an extremely high false positive rate where it credits Deepbit for blocks. I agree with the statement from Blockchain reported Deepbit blocks are not all solved by Deepbit. But if there is a piece of code which reports all untaged blocks as Deepbit blocks then we should not see any solominer blocks which is not true. There are also untaged blocks from solominers reported. My guess is Deepbit is very well connected within the network it's like a supernode and relay only so many blocks fom others with IP addresses which are known as Deepbit IP addresses. Deepbit is on hetzner, they're not anywhere near what would be called a "supernode". Best guess is there's simply a *huge* number of IPs which blockchain.info automatically assigns as "Deepbit" due to the number of Deepbit blocks that used to be relayed through them frequently. nearly all (90%+ ?) of the blocks that say Deepbit originate from my node, 5.9.24.81 a lot of them are p2pool blocks ed: oh, and ozcoin too. ozcoin blocks are actually tagged, not sure why it doesn't mark them as such. the rest are probably the iohash or w/e you mentioned (and a few solo miners maybe) |
|
|
|
If you want to be taken seriously present your case clearly "a block that'll most likely be orphaned" is not the same than an orphaned p2pool share. It's a misleading statement at best FUD at worst, don't be surprised to see "bullshit" in response.
I usually don't read your posts in details anymore as I can't understand much of it without disproportionate efforts, but what reads like a risk of orphaned blocks with no basis is enough to catch my attention...
Everything is "FUD", misleading, or needs more data... go ahead, present yourself as the resident p2pool 'guru', solicit more donations my pool is public and I make shit all from it, but it is fun to tinker with. like the change regarding punishing shares, it's 35/35 since then. ofc that's too small a sample to make a conclusive opinion, but it's promising i don't read your posts either, unless they're directed towards me. obvious, right? otherwise I wouldn't be spewing all the FUD as I'd already know all the answers Based off of p2pool 13.3. 6 nodes with one having 98% of the hashrate. Any help would be appreciated. I wouldn't have a clue how to fix it, but it'd probably be helpful to (someone) to know if you're the node that's contributing the 98% |
|
|
|
|
QfJNcqsWbZ6hi1bxVhQEqCm3kPyHeR6juF just started and found block:
QfJNcqsWbZ6hi1bxVhQEqCm3kPyHeR6juF: 5.12
QfD5gf3Xqnj1PWN5xFp4dbsehkwmcJ5vX5: 63.10611
Qb1VvQJorRQmJB41Rfzu82HUXrytKFNTPE: 955.77388
that's crazy... so, after that matures, i'll send 500, seems only fair, haha
|
|
|
|
ed: tho the pool i just put up will get more p2pool orphaned shares, since it's 500khash vs 50mhash or whatever. soon to be 0 since i'm turning off my cpuminer.. oh, i'm getting the right # of shares, but it seems to be underreporting my hashrate (should be that 500khash, says 50khash. but for shares found, it's like 350khash)
Your miner is "outdated", a fresh git clone should help https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=260031.msg3021932#msg3021932I'll think about the bootstrapp address, slow miners on a 200 MH pool would recieve <1QRK payouts, not sure if that'd be worth it. Ah, I'm using a windows build, too much work, heh.. I might mess w/ it later on my virtual machine w/ ubuntu.. I guess for now I'll disconnect my node and run a 'separate' pool if we aren't going to connect everyone up... right now I'm just shooting myself in the foot (much higher chance of shares being orphaned). Though I guess it's not much of a pool, if nobody switches... I might run 1 or 2 threads on my CPU, I guess |
|
|
|
Cool, the more nodes the better!  Do you guys think I should put Neisklar's node as bootstrap addres? Maybe it is wiser to have a number of separate p2pools so that users get fewer but higher payouts, minimizing tx fees. I dunno, it seems to me like it'd be better to have all the p2pool nodes connected.. I noticed that your pool had a number of double solved blocks (115761, 115750, 115742). So some orphans there.. But, anyway, hooking up all the p2pool nodes would mean less orphans for p2pool solved blocks. it should already be reduced a decent amount (from solo miners), since my quarkcoind has tons of connections ed: tho the pool i just put up will get more p2pool orphaned shares, since it's 500khash vs 50mhash or whatever. soon to be 0 since i'm turning off my cpuminer.. oh, i'm getting the right # of shares, but it seems to be underreporting my hashrate (should be that 500khash, says 50khash. but for shares found, it's like 350khash) |
|
|
|
I can't get mine working properly... it's getting some error about 'quark-hash' not being found or some such & not loading headers... just going to take it down instead of leaving that shell up I had the same problem until I looked around in Neisklar's Github. Git clone this https://github.com/Neisklar/quarkcoin-hash-python , then python setup.py install, then the pool should work. Thanks to everyone testing, seems to run good so far, weirdly my yacpool had some hiccups this morning, investigating. Ah, cool.. yeah, that fixed it. I put your IP as a bootstrap address, but I don't guess it'll work properly until you change that persist value to true instead of false? ed: nm, it does seem to be working. i'm getting mined payouts already and it looks like your node accepted my share So, http://nogleg.com:8372 is working now, 8372 is also the mining port (username is quarkcoin payout address). It's set to 0% fee, etc, etc |
|
|
|
I can't get mine working properly... it's getting some error about 'quark-hash' not being found or some such & not loading headers... just going to take it down instead of leaving that shell up |
|
|
|
我挖了三天一个都没挖到，I5 3210
I did not dig dug three days one, I5 3210 --- Google translate -- assuming his i5 had not mined a single block in 3 days. Correct! I mined (excavated/dug) three days and never got one ("one never hit"), I5 3210. http://nogleg.com:8372/static/*boggle* |
|
|
|
I could use some testers: http://qrkpool.tk:8868/static/ (just registered so use the one below if this one does not work) http://yacpool.tk:8868/static/1% fee  I wonder if I should put Neisklar's node's IP to "BOOTSTRAP_ADDRS" in the networks.py? Great work Neisklar btw, I'll tip you tomorrow. edit to add: Interestingly the miner reports a much higher hashrate than the p2pool, not sure if that's a bug or if that happens on the other node too. I tried to set this up but it kept getting errors about not locating quark_hasher or some such.. The p2pool website appeared, but it never loaded in any blocks? it connected to the rpc port fine 2013-08-27 21:03:32.398008 Initializing work...
2013-08-27 21:03:32.437453 RECV headers 0102000000da0a32ae29942b51b42888058e063ef820aaee5254d7b805285a9c6300000000d0d09b0e366e403a122db8adc2fe91e7b1554d757a79c5d57f08f0e59af59b0a535a1d52b8cc001d20069b0500
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470203 > Error handling message: (see RECV line)
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470249 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470276 > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/twisted/internet/posixbase.py", line 586, in _doReadOrWrite
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470311 > why = selectable.doRead()
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470354 > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/twisted/internet/tcp.py", line 199, in doRead
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470388 > rval = self.protocol.dataReceived(data)
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470436 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/util/p2protocol.py", line 27, in dataReceived
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470483 > self.dataReceived2(data)
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470527 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/util/datachunker.py", line 40, in _DataChunker
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470558 > wants = receiver.send(buf.get(wants))
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470581 > --- <exception caught here> ---
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470609 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/util/p2protocol.py", line 57, in dataReceiver
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470632 > self.packetReceived(command, type_.unpack(payload, self.ignore_trailing_payload))
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470652 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/util/p2protocol.py", line 71, in packetReceived
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470673 > handler(**payload2)
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470695 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/bitcoin/p2p.py", line 130, in handle_headers
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470731 > header_hash = self.net.BLOCKHASH_FUNC(bitcoin_data.block_header_type.pack(header))
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470751 > File "/home/zevus/p2pool-quarkcoin/p2pool/bitcoin/networks.py", line 25, in <lambda>
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470771 > BLOCKHASH_FUNC=lambda data: pack.IntType(256).unpack(__import__('quark_hash').getPoWHash(data)),
2013-08-27 21:03:32.470791 > exceptions.ImportError: No module named quark_hash
|
|
|
|
it's the same, there is a binary posted about 3 pages back that someone was nice enough to make. If you feel adventures the source has been moved to github.
Compared to the original miner though, it is about 85% faster, uses SSE2 along with ASM for two of the rounds.
uhhhhhhhhhhh 85% faster on AMD Bulldozer CPU's only ? am i wasting my time ripping my hair out trying to compile this newer version (on windows / for windows) for no speed gain on my Intel CPU ? don't know how fast/slow original miner is. the one in the program itself? quarkcoind got about 100khash, quarkcoinqt got about 200khash, and this minerd64_sse2 gets over 1mhash on an i7 4770K |
|
|
|
except sometimes those stales that solve blocks... are, well, a stale right after a block was found. re the shenanigans that go on when switching from one block to another
not sure if p2pool would proceed along it's own chain or not? either way, it's a block that'll most likely be orphaned. that's when the slow getblocktemplate matters
Bullshit. After heaps of messages on this subject on this very thread (last was mine a few messages ago) you still don't understand that p2pool doesn't rely on getblocktemplate result being available to build the coinbase miners are working on. p2pool is connected to the bitcoin P2P network and detects blocks before a getblocktemplate result is available for the new block and present a valid coinbase to miners ASAP. So there's absolutely no reason a "stale p2pool share" block would have more chance of being orphaned than any other block. I think you're the one that doesn't understand, lol. Maybe you should look at the specifics presented. Listen, there's a reason why so many shares get 'punished'. ed: since I've disabled the 'punish' feature you'll be able to see all the orphans. most of the time it's just one, the person unfortunate enough to have the share right before the new block, but just wait for a block where you have 2 or 3 orphans coming off of it, some will have a received time after the new block, but still be working on old block. |
|
|
|
I think it would also be important for the pools to list their bitcoind limitations.
Some p2pools are configured to limit transactions drastically on the Bitcoin network and thus are bad for Bitcoin.
hmm, that'd actually be nice if p2pool pulled the bitcoind information on maxblocksize, fees, etc and posted it on the web page somewhere |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
