Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 10:27:00 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 [510] 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032540 times)
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 03:34:58 PM
 #10181

I have finally found the "potential" problem with my miners. It should be because the difficulty the p2pool giving my miner is too low.

There's a feature in p2pool about setting difficulty: [username]/[pool difficulty]+[local difficulty]

Should I be setting these??? If so, what value should i give for a 1600GH/s Terraminer?
There are literally pages of debates on this very thread about the value of setting share difficulties.  Here's the deal:

Using "/" sets the actual share difficulty.  Unless you set it over the p2pool minimum value, it has no effect.
Using "+" sets the pseudo-share difficulty.  All this does is make graphs look pretty.

Bitmain has stated that you should set *some* value for use with the S3.  They recommend either 256 or 512.  Maybe it's something to do with their drivers and the way they handle work from p2pool's varying difficulty and restarts.  Since nobody has the source code, nobody can do anything about it or make any kind of valid statement one way or the other.

I have personally seen absolutely no difference in my S3s on p2pool either setting the values or leaving them alone.  I do not own any Cointerra gear, so all I can say is for you to try it out.  Put something like ADDRESS/1024+1000 and see what happens.

I'm sure somebody will come along and try to say something different and ignite the entire debate again Smiley

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
1481149620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481149620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481149620
Reply with quote  #2

1481149620
Report to moderator
1481149620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481149620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481149620
Reply with quote  #2

1481149620
Report to moderator
1481149620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481149620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481149620
Reply with quote  #2

1481149620
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481149620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481149620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481149620
Reply with quote  #2

1481149620
Report to moderator
1481149620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481149620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481149620
Reply with quote  #2

1481149620
Report to moderator
kgb2mining
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:49:29 PM
 #10182

I'm going to try some different setting with my cointerras.

CT #1 I've set it to - {address}/1024+1536
CT #2 I've left it alone, meaning just the address.

I have restarted cgminer on both boxes at the same time to get a direct comparison over time.  I'll report back later with what I see, if any difference either way.
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 05:02:54 PM
 #10183

I'm going to try some different setting with my cointerras.

CT #1 I've set it to - {address}/1024+1536
CT #2 I've left it alone, meaning just the address.

I have restarted cgminer on both boxes at the same time to get a direct comparison over time.  I'll report back later with what I see, if any difference either way.
Looking forward to your results.  Hopefully you will see some improvement.

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1320


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 05:31:56 PM
 #10184

/1024 give you nothing, because current share diff is way higher.

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
My SatoshDice bot https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897685
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 05:36:20 PM
 #10185

/1024 give you nothing, because current share diff is way higher.
See my earlier comments.  While it means nothing to the node perhaps there is a benefit to the hardware by using static difficulty.  As I stated I saw none at all on the S3.  Maybe the cointerra rigs do... I doubt it but you never know until you experiment Smiley

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
kgb2mining
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 06:05:23 PM
 #10186

Results might have to wait, I think I might have an overheating controller on my first unit.  The CTA0 board temps keep going through the roof, then bouncing to almost nothing, a sign that the machine is effectively throttling itself from burning up.  I'm going to go replace the thermal grease and see what happens.

Initial comparisons on the other controller so far have been about equal to the other, non-modified Cointerra, about 600GH/s.
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 06:44:53 PM
 #10187

Hmmmm...Has anyone else's namecoind borked since updating Xubuntu with the latest security updates? I'm getting "timeout getting getauxblock" all of a sudden...... Huh

Seem to remember getting the same after upgrading from 12.04 to 14.04 a while ago due to a change in the Ubuntu kernel.

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 09:08:10 PM
 #10188

Hmmmm...Has anyone else's namecoind borked since updating Xubuntu with the latest security updates? I'm getting "timeout getting getauxblock" all of a sudden...... Huh

Seem to remember getting the same after upgrading from 12.04 to 14.04 a while ago due to a change in the Ubuntu kernel.
I didn't do a thing to my node and noticed namecoind was taking up large chunks of CPU and also timing out on the getauxblock calls.  Noticed it this morning.  I ended up just getting rid of the merge-mining altogether on my node at this point.  The only coin I actually have a ton of is FSC (well over a million of them), but that coin is deader than Elvis.

EDIT: I'm running my node natively on OSX Mavericks 10.9.4, so it's definitely not limited to Xubuntu.

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 09:19:08 PM
 #10189

Thanks JB, so it's not just me then. I'll investigate further........

Edit: I notice forrestv made a change to the p2poool repo ( Shocked!) 7 days ago, increased maximum worker difficulty 1000x, that wouldn't be the cause......would it?

Edit2: Tried running namecoin on rav3n_pl fork with the same results, so it's not a p2pool issue. Had to close the namecoin wallet as it was eating cpu as well. Oh well, that'll have to stay off then.......... Tongue Very strange.

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
bitcoinbearhk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 12:27:51 AM
 #10190

Results might have to wait, I think I might have an overheating controller on my first unit.  The CTA0 board temps keep going through the roof, then bouncing to almost nothing, a sign that the machine is effectively throttling itself from burning up.  I'm going to go replace the thermal grease and see what happens.

Initial comparisons on the other controller so far have been about equal to the other, non-modified Cointerra, about 600GH/s.

so as it seems, each half Cointerra having 680GHs when mining at p2pool instead of 800GHs is normal??? I wonder if it is just the p2pool share system makes the cointerra machine makes it think it is mining slower, but it is actually mining at 800GHs maybe???
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 12:34:20 AM
 #10191

Results might have to wait, I think I might have an overheating controller on my first unit.  The CTA0 board temps keep going through the roof, then bouncing to almost nothing, a sign that the machine is effectively throttling itself from burning up.  I'm going to go replace the thermal grease and see what happens.

Initial comparisons on the other controller so far have been about equal to the other, non-modified Cointerra, about 600GH/s.

so as it seems, each half Cointerra having 680GHs when mining at p2pool instead of 800GHs is normal??? I wonder if it is just the p2pool share system makes the cointerra machine makes it think it is mining slower, but it is actually mining at 800GHs maybe???

I believe the S2s have a problem restarting work every 30 seconds, and that's why the hashrate decreases.  I'd imagine the same thing happens with other ASICs.

M

MMinerMonitor author, monitor/auto/schedule reboots/alerts/remote/MobileMiner for Ants and Spondoolies! Latest (5.2). MPoolMonitor author, monitor stats/workers for most pools, global BTC stats (current/nxt diff/USD val/hashrate/calc)! Latest (v4.2) 
Buyer beware of Bitmain hardware and services.
bitcoinbearhk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 01:50:45 AM
 #10192

Results might have to wait, I think I might have an overheating controller on my first unit.  The CTA0 board temps keep going through the roof, then bouncing to almost nothing, a sign that the machine is effectively throttling itself from burning up.  I'm going to go replace the thermal grease and see what happens.

Initial comparisons on the other controller so far have been about equal to the other, non-modified Cointerra, about 600GH/s.

so as it seems, each half Cointerra having 680GHs when mining at p2pool instead of 800GHs is normal??? I wonder if it is just the p2pool share system makes the cointerra machine makes it think it is mining slower, but it is actually mining at 800GHs maybe???

I believe the S2s have a problem restarting work every 30 seconds, and that's why the hashrate decreases.  I'd imagine the same thing happens with other ASICs.

M

Is there a workaround for this problem?  P2Pool is so supper cool, but having 20% ripped off the mining speed is not cool.
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2014, 03:14:43 AM
 #10193

Both shameless self promotion, and answers to a few questions I've been getting a lot...

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/p2pool-become-easier-coincadence-acquires-p2pool-org/2014/08/17

New p2pool.org to be launched by September.

Coin Cadence open source front end available by November.

Press Release:

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s91/sh/b7a22e98-1a1e-47fc-8828-59b4dd67cc6e/987b876f430c7b582d4a4b4e8e7c73ab

Also actively looking for developers with a realistic solution to small miner variance, drop me a line...

bitcoinbearhk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 04:33:15 AM
 #10194

Both shameless self promotion, and answers to a few questions I've been getting a lot...

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/p2pool-become-easier-coincadence-acquires-p2pool-org/2014/08/17

New p2pool.org to be launched by September.

Coin Cadence open source front end available by November.

Press Release:

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s91/sh/b7a22e98-1a1e-47fc-8828-59b4dd67cc6e/987b876f430c7b582d4a4b4e8e7c73ab

Also actively looking for developers with a realistic solution to small miner variance, drop me a line...

Read... So, it would seems to me that a 10~20% decrease in efficiency for large miners such as Cointerra and S2 is a known issue and unresolved .....  Cry

Not sure if I should stay in P2Pool with my Cointerra gears in this case .... sad  Cry
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2014, 04:42:07 AM
 #10195

...

Read... So, it would seems to me that a 10~20% decrease in efficiency for large miners such as Cointerra and S2 is a known issue and unresolved .....  Cry

Not sure if I should stay in P2Pool with my Cointerra gears in this case .... sad  Cry

While the issue with the S2 has been well documented here, you are the first case of a problem with Cointerra gear I have seen.

Cointerra is specifically listed in the wiki as working well.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool#Interoperability_table

I would also like to hear from other Cointerra miners on p2pool.

bitcoinbearhk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 04:52:28 AM
 #10196

...

Read... So, it would seems to me that a 10~20% decrease in efficiency for large miners such as Cointerra and S2 is a known issue and unresolved .....  Cry

Not sure if I should stay in P2Pool with my Cointerra gears in this case .... sad  Cry

While the issue with the S2 has been well documented here, you are the first case of a problem with Cointerra gear I have seen.

Cointerra is specifically listed in the wiki as working well.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool#Interoperability_table

I would also like to hear from other Cointerra miners on p2pool.


i have setup my own node on Windows 7, and mining for over a day.

hash show up on cointerra is a constant 1350 GHs instead of the normal 1600 GHs... checked not heat problem, can resume 1600 with regular pools......

desperate to find a solution.
bitcoinbearhk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 06:06:28 AM
 #10197

...

Read... So, it would seems to me that a 10~20% decrease in efficiency for large miners such as Cointerra and S2 is a known issue and unresolved .....  Cry

Not sure if I should stay in P2Pool with my Cointerra gears in this case .... sad  Cry

While the issue with the S2 has been well documented here, you are the first case of a problem with Cointerra gear I have seen.

Cointerra is specifically listed in the wiki as working well.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool#Interoperability_table

I would also like to hear from other Cointerra miners on p2pool.


i have setup my own node on Windows 7, and mining for over a day.

hash show up on cointerra is a constant 1350 GHs instead of the normal 1600 GHs... checked not heat problem, can resume 1600 with regular pools......

desperate to find a solution.


I saw this on wiki:

Requirement:
    Windows:
        Install Python 2.7: http://www.python.org/getit/
        Install Twisted: http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/Downloads
        Install Zope.Interface: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.interface/3.8.0
            Unzip the files into C:\Python27\Lib\site-packages

Well I have not installed the Python 2.7, Twisted and Zope.  Will that be a problem resulting in my Cointerra's under performance???
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 09:31:57 AM
 #10198

I saw this on wiki:

Requirement:
    Windows:
        Install Python 2.7: http://www.python.org/getit/
        Install Twisted: http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/Downloads
        Install Zope.Interface: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.interface/3.8.0
            Unzip the files into C:\Python27\Lib\site-packages

Well I have not installed the Python 2.7, Twisted and Zope.  Will that be a problem resulting in my Cointerra's under performance???

No.  If p2pool is running, you have the right requirements OR you're using the executable which doesn't need that.

I'm not using my S2 on p2pool because of underperformance.  I tried for a few days throwing away 10% of my hash power and 5% rejects, and it was abysmal. 

M

MMinerMonitor author, monitor/auto/schedule reboots/alerts/remote/MobileMiner for Ants and Spondoolies! Latest (5.2). MPoolMonitor author, monitor stats/workers for most pools, global BTC stats (current/nxt diff/USD val/hashrate/calc)! Latest (v4.2) 
Buyer beware of Bitmain hardware and services.
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
August 19, 2014, 11:26:26 AM
 #10199

Thanks JB, so it's not just me then. I'll investigate further........

Edit: I notice forrestv made a change to the p2poool repo ( Shocked!) 7 days ago, increased maximum worker difficulty 1000x, that wouldn't be the cause......would it?

Edit2: Tried running namecoin on rav3n_pl fork with the same results, so it's not a p2pool issue. Had to close the namecoin wallet as it was eating cpu as well. Oh well, that'll have to stay off then.......... Tongue Very strange.
There have been some huge blocks recently aggregating a mass of tiny inputs. This seems to lead to getauxblock taking a very long time. We are looking into it but it might take a while.

BTW: As far as I know Namecoin mining reward variance is very high with P2P. We would be happy to support any plans to improve this, maybe with a bounty.

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2014, 11:36:37 AM
 #10200


There have been some huge blocks recently aggregating a mass of tiny inputs. This seems to lead to getauxblock taking a very long time. We are looking into it but it might take a while.

BTW: As far as I know Namecoin mining reward variance is very high with P2P. We would be happy to support any plans to improve this, maybe with a bounty.


Thanks for that phelix - I thought I was going a little mad there. I'm still not sure how large block size can cause a timeout error like this though, tbh - what am I missing?  Tongue

Peace.

EDIT: Scrap that - I get it now. (I was too lazy to read up on it before  Wink)

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
Pages: « 1 ... 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 [510] 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 ... 744 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!