Where can I download the chain? I've been running p2pool for a day and it's at 12000/17000. It's so slow.
It's already done. You don't need them to all be verified to mine... That's a bit confusing. |
|
|
|
from what i understand orphan shares are ones that were recieved too late by the other clients - and some other solution was accepted first.
but what are the dead shares?
They're essentially orphans, but they're special because they arrived at your p2poold from your miner _after_ your p2poold sent out a long poll. Essentially, you can blame dead shares on your miner configuration and orphan shares on internet latency. EDIT: About the strange outputs, those are as Holliday explained. However, I plan to eventually embed that data into the merged mining header so we won't be bloating the blockchain as much. |
|
|
|
Strange things going on here:
The windows exe (p2pool_0.8.1_c7feb00.zip) works as expected, about one share per hour or so.
Today I tried installing Python 2.7 and using the source (forrestv-p2pool-release-0.8.1-71-gfff1dd9.zip).
Now cgminer 2.1.2 suddenly finds about 3 or 4 shares per minute.
The development version gives work to miners at a low difficulty so you can see how "well-tuned" your miner is by looking at the reject ratio over shorter periods of time. |
|
|
|
You need to upgrade to a version of P2Pool from git. Does /recent_blocks work?
Yes, to some degree for recent versions from git.  It's not guaranteed to show you all blocks because some might have been orphaned or dead, and it may display blocks from far in the past. |
|
|
|
anyone knows how to turn off longpolling in the json commands for cgminer? I tried this: but it doesn't work. I can turn it off when it's running through the ncurses interface, but I would rather just have it in the conf. I'm also getting a lot of rejects in cgminer and lots of dead shares in p2pool. is it not worth mining in p2pool with 200 mh? P2Pool pretty much requires long polling - without it you get a lot of dead shares. Lots of rejects and dead shares might be due to bad connectivity or a too-high intensity on cgminer. |
|
|
|
Cant you just direct the --merged-url at a namecoin pool?
Hmm... that sounds like it just might work. Are there any namecoin only pools still? How about this: Setup a local p2pool with namecoind as the main chain Setup another local p2pool with bitcoind as the main chain and merged mining to the previously setup p2pool Point workers to your local bitcoin p2pool This would keep everything in p2pool so we don't have to give pool operators any power even on the alt-chain. I'm not sure how badly you would get hurt with longpolling and stales. Sadly, neither of these approaches will work. P2Pool queries namecoin using the "getauxblock" RPC call instead of the normal "getwork" call. It'd be possible for a Namecoin mining pool to implement "getauxblock", but I doubt that any do. Pointing P2Pool at another P2Pool will not work for the same reason - P2Pool only presents "getwork" to miners. Fairly complex changes to P2Pool are needed to make pooled merged mining work. |
|
|
|
I just cant get this running. I'm using win7: Starting bitcoind then run_p2pool.exe test test (test is username and password) cgminer.exe -o http://127.0.0.1:9332 -u test -p test Looks like cgminer is running fine, but i dont get any shares in p2pool window P2Pool's difficulty is currently about 240. It might take a while to get a share depending on how much hashing power you have. See http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/old_calculator.php |
|
|
|
|
This is a new problem with P2Pool that I'm trying to figure out now... Anyone who is having the problem: Restart P2Pool with the --debug flag. If the problem persists, it'd be very useful to me if you sent me P2Pool's log file (in data/bitcoin/log)!
|
|
|
|
Been there, done that.  Success: I can see your service on xx.247.9.10 on port (9333)
Your ISP is not blocking port 9333 Also, first thing I did was an nmap from an external server. Result: "open". I knew that, but I double-checked anyway. So.. yeah. Maybe i'm being paranoid, but the whole ">10 peers" really seems utopic/flawed. I made my node connect to your address (using the -n option), so you should have at least 11 peers now. Something might be wrong with the share ranking algorithm, though if I look at the address database, it says that your node has only been up for about 22 hours (since unix timestamp 1326773440). Does that sound right..? It would be really cool if this were integrated directly into cgminer. forrestv what do you think of that? Have you had any dialog with ckolivas at all?
I worked a bit with him to get cgminer and P2Pool working well together. I don't know how useful that would be... A lot of people have multiple machines running cgminer and one P2Pool instance. Why do you want it integrated? I'd think some kind of monitoring tool that started P2Pool and cgminer might be better. Been running merged for 24+ hrs with cgminer on defaults and I 8 and was a bit shocked at the E, U, and Rejected, which would normally be 120%, 19.5/m and .6%. Can anyone recommend settings changes or do these numbers look good?
P2Pool has characteristics very different from most mining pools. Work is given a difficulty of 8 instead of 1, which explains the decreased U. Work expiring more quickly (every 10 seconds instead of 10 minutes) decreases cgminer's displayed efficiency and increases rejects. P2Pool's displayed efficiency is very close to 100%, so everything seems okay. Efficiency is the ultimate indicator of how well everything is working. |
|
|
|
EDIT: I really have to study this whole (new for me) process in more depth, many things are not clear to me.
Seems P2Pool just got block 162404, and while it's immature, my incoming transaction from 'bitcoind listtransactions' is around half the value shown in blockexplorer.
(doesn't mean anything is wrong, i was just not used to looking so much "under the hood").
If you have any ideas for how to clarify the documentation, you could help improve it. Output from listtransactions should match the block shown in blockexplorer. What address were you mining to? Maybe pastebin the output of listtransactions? |
|
|
|
Have there been no payouts between now and Saturday morning?
We haven't had any blocks in more than a day. However, a couple of days ago, we got three blocks in one day! I setup p2pool as my backup pool. I also setup merged mining with namecoin. Is there anyone work on improving p2pool sharing the aux chain? Effectively solo-mining the aux chain can't be the best we can do. Is there a block explorer-like site for the p2pool chain? It would be interesting to see how much hash power, the contributions, numbers of peers, etc. http://forre.st:9332/graphs/ has some stuff, but not much. Pooled mining for auxchains is on the TODO list... though there are still some problems I'm trying to figure out. A "share explorer" sounds like a good idea. It'd be easy to add to P2Pool's web interface, too. When using the -a to specify an address, does this have to be an address that's in bitcoind, and has a private key available locally, or can I specify any bitcoin address, such as one on another computer or my phone's wallet?
It can be any Bitcoin address. Does anyone know the most efficient cgminer settings (scantime, queue, --submit-stale)? And will load balance work, or is that not recommended?
EDIT: Reset everything, now connected. I know there should be a lot of longpoll requests, but is it normal to have more than the accepted shares?
I don't use any flags, and it seems to work very well for me. Load balance should work unless cgminer is broken... Has anyone else tried it? Lots of longpolls are completely normal. If that is really how it was supposed to work, then something is wrong. I, too, have forwarded port (tested), and I also only got More will come with time. Peers are ranked based on how long they've been up and available to others. is it just me or does p2pool eat up a LOT of bandwidth?.. im not on a super mega fast connection but its decent and it slows down to a crawl.
During the initial sharechain download, it has to download about 30 MB. After that, it should never use more than about 4 kB/s. If you can confirm that it's actually using a lot more, I'd appreciate you running it with --debug and pastebinning some of the output. Is there no -a option for merged mining to pay namecoins to an external address?
No, all Namecoin work is handled by namecoind currently. |
|
|
|
Some noob questions about running p2pool under Windows 7: 17:06:46.878000 p2pool (version unknown) Is this a side effect of using py2exe? 19:03:31.197000 Pool: 75939MH/s in 17322 shares (17327/17327 verified) 17322 shares, but 17327 verified? I understand that this number should be higher if I have forwarded the port 9333 in my router, right? The "version unknown" is fine. It detects the version by looking at the name of the folder that it's in.. Did you rename it? It doesn't matter much anyway. Newer versions are going to have the version embedded in the executable. Not having all shares verified is normal when you haven't been using p2pool for long. It doesn't matter and is only because a particular share requires the previous day of shares in order to be verified, so they can't all immediately be verified. Yes, the client is limited to 10 outgoing connections, but if you forward the port, you can get more incoming ones. |
|
|
|
No I didn't copy any files. p2pool gave me a connection error, and when I checked bitcoind was no longer running. My rigs don't have a lot of memory or storage. If I run bitcoind, namecoind, and p2pool on another machine, I will have to forward 9333, 8333, and 8334 and then can connect multiple miners to that IP correct?
Yes, connect them to port 9332. |
|
|
|
Would it benefit both smaller traditional pools, and P2Pool, if the traditional pools mined for P2Pool?
P2Pool as a 10 second share time doesn't it? If this means a traditional pool would have to expose 10 second longpolls to its clients I don't think it'd work very well. A new Bitcoin-P2Pool could be made for pools with a much larger share interval (2 minutes?). In fact, it would be possible to create a P2Pool-P2Pool that mines for shares on the new Bitcoin-P2Pool. |
|
|
|
How do I see how many of my shares are currently "active"? What exactly does "recent" mean? 21:44:04.984000 Pool: 72503MH/s in 17341 shares (11921) Recent:0
.42% >304MH/s Shares: 3 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Peers: 11
I mined 4 shares an hour ago, restarted the client, and mined another 3. Based on the specifics of this pools PPLNS system, I don't think the first four should have expired yet. There's no way to see the number of your shares active in the sharechain (at least currently). However, the "Payout if block" and "Recent" reflect active shares, and what Holliday said applies only to those two. "Recent" means "your shares in the last two hours, paying to the current address." The share counter only displays shares mined the current process. |
|
|
|
Two things ... first, the code seems to actually be checking the
target before submitting back to the pool. I might have misread,
but every CPU implementation in cgminer actually calls fulltest
on a matching piece of work.
Second, I now have mined close to 40 shares that all triggered
a "worker submitted share with hash > target" ... this is increasingly
likely a bug somewhere.
Question : what made you say that older version of cgminer displayed
this behavior ? Did I miss something in the way the target is handled
by cgminer in the case of your pool ?
I am very sure that it doesn't... I am testing CPU mining with cgminer and looked at the code. The CPU mining code never calls fulltest. One of every 138 of your shares should qualify as a P2Pool share. An older version of cgminer didn't check the target when GPU mining. |
|
|
|
Is this http://forre.st:9332/patron_sendmany?total=1.5 reporting correctly? I was about to send another donation to the miners and in the process noticed there were far fewer addresses today compared to yesterday. I'll hold off for now. This is intended. It now combines very small (<0.01 BTC) addresses using a proportional lottery (gmaxwell's work). |
|
|
|
I compiled it from source about two days ago.
I guess that might qualify as old ... let me go recompile then.
(btw, I am mining on a CPU, in case this has a bearing).
Ah, nevermind, I guess the CPU miner doesn't check the target. That's fine then. You should get a real P2Pool share about every 17 shares that cgminer says it submitted. |
|
|
|
Something I don't understand ... . I start the bitcoin daemon, wait till it's up and running . I start the pool daemon with a payout address specified on the command line and whose private key is in the wallet of the bitcoin daemon . They talk to one another fine . I start cgminer, it gets shares from the pool fine and after a while, solves some . The pool reports solved shares received from the miner Everything looks peachy until I decide to look at: http://127.0.0.1:9332/current_payoutsMy payout address is nowhere to be seen  Am I missing something ? Look at P2Pool's status line. Are the shares not orphaned or dead? If they're not, they should definitely be displayed in /current_payouts . Status line ? Where do I get that ? Do you mean the last line of the logs ? This is what the logs say:
2012-01-10 23:10:39.152235 New work for worker! Share difficulty: 130.946215 Payout if block: 0.005189 BTC Total block value: 50.041000 BTC including 38 transactions
2012-01-10 23:10:41.490309 Pool: 64794MH/s in 17365 shares (17369/17369 verified) Recent: 0.00% >0H/s Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Peers: 10
2012-01-10 23:10:41.490381 Average time between blocks: 0.96 days
2012-01-10 23:10:41.490426 Pool stales: 12%
Digging in the logs, here's the latest accepted share:
2012-01-10 23:09:29.541931 Worker submitted share with hash > target:
2012-01-10 23:09:29.542019 Hash: e509b74eb3ad7ce0cedb0a47495f586aafa73714965bffb1d94f890a
2012-01-10 23:09:29.543537 Target: 1fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
And cgminer reports 22 shares as accepted by the pool. sad You haven't gotten any shares yet - "Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead)". The "Worker submitted share with hash > target" would seem to indicate that you have an old version of cgminer... You should upgrade it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
