Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 04:00:46 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2031618 times)
Matt Corallo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 751


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 03:39:10 AM
 #10481

New Zealand

A Sydney or Auckland node would help the AUS/NZ region for sure.

You can see the routes below

...........

That is some strange routing indeed...NZ->JPY->SIN and NZ->SJC->SEA...are there any providers you know of in SIN that have proper routes from NZ? I was gonna move the SIN server to another provider in SIN anyway...

Bitcoin Ubuntu PPA maintainer - donate to me personally: 1JBMattRztKDF2KRS3vhjJXA7h47NEsn2c
http://bitcoinrelaynetwork.org maintainer
PGP ID: 07DF 3E57 A548 CCFB 7530  7091 89BB B866 3E2E65CE
1481040046
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040046

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040046
Reply with quote  #2

1481040046
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481040046
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040046

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040046
Reply with quote  #2

1481040046
Report to moderator
1481040046
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040046

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040046
Reply with quote  #2

1481040046
Report to moderator
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 05:21:48 AM
 #10482

New Zealand

A Sydney or Auckland node would help the AUS/NZ region for sure.

You can see the routes below

...........

That is some strange routing indeed...NZ->JPY->SIN and NZ->SJC->SEA...are there any providers you know of in SIN that have proper routes from NZ? I was gonna move the SIN server to another provider in SIN anyway...


We have been experimenting with LBR (Latency Based Routing) on the AWS platform. The routes from "outliers" are almost always geographically bizarre, and as far as latency is concerned are about 90% accurate on the current fastest route. What I have realized is that they will pick the most reliable fastest route, which is not always fastest, but is more likely to reach its destination...

windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 05:53:56 AM
 #10483


24 Hour average hash rate passes 3 PH/s!


linuxforyou
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 06:26:56 AM
 #10484

More and more blocks with p2pool which is nice, however Is it really useful now for smaller miners?

RTFM
coinme.info
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261

Interesting...


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 06:58:07 AM
 #10485

New Zealand

A Sydney or Auckland node would help the AUS/NZ region for sure.

You can see the routes below

...........

That is some strange routing indeed...NZ->JPY->SIN and NZ->SJC->SEA...are there any providers you know of in SIN that have proper routes from NZ? I was gonna move the SIN server to another provider in SIN anyway...


The best routes I've found for AUS/NZ are to the US on the Southern Cross cable.



The C - D - E1 route is

C -    ae1-10.tkbr12.global-gateway.net.nz -    0 |   52 |   52 |   18 |   25 |   37 |   27 |
    xe7-0-1-10.lebr7.global-gateway.net.nz -    0 |   52 |   52 |  141 |  150 |  184 |  144 |
E1 -    ae3-10.sjbr3.global-gateway.net.nz -    0 |   52 |   52 |  145 |  162 |  188 |  154 |

Not too bad for 12,000+ kms

Asia is all over the show as you can see with that SYD-JPY-SIN path using NTT.

Pacnet is a long time provider in the Asia Pacific area and have a new DC in SIN that may be an option

http://www.pacnet.com/data-center-services/hardware-as-a-service/

Not sure of the pricing for this, you'd have to drop them an email.

 Smiley

follow me @CoinMeInfo for irregular random crypto insights...
EErik
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 10:36:00 AM
 #10486

I totally agree with you and understand what is going on. I was just curious to hear from others. I understand the difficulty levels and the drop in pay.... As we all know, it dosent stop the electric bill and its HUGE.
I love mining and all of it, but I dont want to take my money and invest thousands more and be behind the eight ball for months to catch up like I did with this 5000.00 investment on the 4 T. I am finally ahead of the game and made a few bucks.
I am at that crossroad.... yes I could invest again and start all over...... I dont know its a dilemma that I have to come to grips with. Maybe I will sell off all of my S-1's and just run 1 S-2 at some pool to keep my hands and head in the game............  Thanks for your thoughts as thats all I was looking for!......
Nobody understands this crazy game we play but those of us wrapped up in it!!!
Couldn't agree more... Smiley

It's good that you've at least gotten to the point where you're a little ahead.  Sadly there's many who haven't and may never, and it'll be a completely losing proposition for them.  If you sell your equipment now you'll even be that much more ahead of the game, and like you said if you can get maybe just one or two things to keep it going as a hobby it'll be enough.  I think honestly that's how many will need to treat it - a hobby where they understand they may lose more than they invest but it's still kinda a neat thing to be part of.

Mining is certainly more about the passion and the geeky side of it than any rational explanation can bear.  I suffer the same disease... Smiley

if the share diff to raise the reward was lower, it would be much easier for small-scale miners have a constant reward, let us realize that now with 3ph/s is really shocking make a share and many are coming out.

The latest shares I made have given me 5mbtc which is very much higher than the daily reward of a small miner, the scale of the reward should be much more fragmented imho and, in this way, many more people participate

I do not understand the discourse that many are coming out of the pool because they have old hardware. there should be a replacement ... I think if people with older hardware comes out other with new should arrive, but it is not.

E

No shares, no party!
coinme.info
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261

Interesting...


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 10:40:58 AM
 #10487

My node running Matt's fork with the embedded python-based relay code has been up for almost 24 hours now.  Initial reports seem that it's doing very well in general - over 110% efficiency for long periods, currently at 115%.  19 shares so far, all good - 0/0 orph/dead.

So, at the very least it's not hurting it at all, and hopefully is helping.  Will need to run longer to see how the share rates and efficiency do... I seem to see that as it goes along, getting past the 40 share mark is when I start seeing orphans/dead pop up.

On a side note tho - anyone seeing their DOA rates climb higher over the past week or so?  I was happily running around 3-4% DOA for the longest time but now I'm seeing it in the 6-8% range quite a lot.  Still better than the pool average, but I'm wondering if there's a core reason for the rates rising.  (and yes I've changed my S3's down from the default queue 4096, and I've tried 0 and 1 with neither being any majorly different).

Similar results to you using Matt's fork and the embedded python-based relay since I got this going on Windows Server 2012 R2 with an update from Matt.

Version: unknown 7032706f6f6c2d6d6173746572
Pool rate: 3.00PH/s (13% DOA+orphan) Share difficulty: 12700000
Node uptime: 14.9 hours Peers: 6 out, 3 in
Local rate: 2.38TH/s (3.6% DOA) Expected time to share: 6.4 hours
Shares: 2 total (0 orphaned, 0 dead) Efficiency: 115.0%

Not seeing the increase in DOA yet but I've probably jinxed it now so time will tell.

GBT latency is the big issue for me as I'm 12,000+km of fiber away from Matt's US-West node which I'm using as it was 100ms faster than the AU node.
This is normal as any US-West servers are normally lower latency than Asia nodes due to network topology.

Currently GBT is between 0.2 - 0.4 so I'm happy with that and the low DOA and normal shares being found seems to support that things are running ok.


Just a followup on Matt's fork with the python-based relay included.

Version: unknown 7032706f6f6c2d6d6173746572
Pool rate: 2.45PH/s (13% DOA+orphan) Share difficulty: 11500000
Node uptime: 13.5 hours Peers: 6 out, 5 in
Local rate: 3.03TH/s (1.7% DOA) Expected time to share: 4.5 hours
Shares: 2 total (0 orphaned, 0 dead) Efficiency: 115.0%

Did a restart of P2pool unfortunately as something maxed out my upload bandwidth otherwise would have a full 24+ hour snap shot.
Turned out the be a web browser client & not p2pool but now I know to trust p2pool over any other app!

So low DOA and a respectable Getwork Latency Mean of 0.305s using Antminer S1s and S3s

Matt's relay node mod has made a real difference to my p2pool node.

Thanks Matt!

follow me @CoinMeInfo for irregular random crypto insights...
jedimstr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784



View Profile
August 31, 2014, 11:16:12 AM
 #10488

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 12:25:22 PM
 #10489

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

The biggest gain I'd say to using the combined version is that you won't need Java on your machine.

I'm going to switch my public node to using the combined version, see if it helps.

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.
Duce
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 04:37:52 PM
 #10490

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

The biggest gain I'd say to using the combined version is that you won't need Java on your machine.

I'm going to switch my public node to using the combined version, see if it helps.

M

I see that you changed your pool to Matt's fork (python included) as well. Did you try to use your extended node status and found that it did not work? I too have seen an improvement as others with Matt's fork but lost the ability to run a parallel version. I am really asking to verify that it is not just me? This is by no means a discredit to Matt's efforts as the loss of a "pretty" display does not take away from the improved performance.
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 06:16:21 PM
 #10491

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

The biggest gain I'd say to using the combined version is that you won't need Java on your machine.

I'm going to switch my public node to using the combined version, see if it helps.

M

I see that you changed your pool to Matt's fork (python included) as well. Did you try to use your extended node status and found that it did not work? I too have seen an improvement as others with Matt's fork but lost the ability to run a parallel version. I am really asking to verify that it is not just me? This is by no means a discredit to Matt's efforts as the loss of a "pretty" display does not take away from the improved performance.

Not sure what you mean by extended node status?

I still have a pretty display, as far as I can tell.  Not the best, but better than the default.

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.
Duce
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 07:35:33 PM
 #10492

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

The biggest gain I'd say to using the combined version is that you won't need Java on your machine.

I'm going to switch my public node to using the combined version, see if it helps.

M

I see that you changed your pool to Matt's fork (python included) as well. Did you try to use your extended node status and found that it did not work? I too have seen an improvement as others with Matt's fork but lost the ability to run a parallel version. I am really asking to verify that it is not just me? This is by no means a discredit to Matt's efforts as the loss of a "pretty" display does not take away from the improved performance.

Not sure what you mean by extended node status?

I still have a pretty display, as far as I can tell.  Not the best, but better than the default.

M
I can't get anything but the default to work, I built the node twice to make sure I did not do something wrong but it does not seem to pull the data in. I must be missing something. When I access the non-default front end it shows up on the web but does not display any data, it worked before this build. Well I would rather let it run than waste the time to playing with another front end.
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 07:39:32 PM
 #10493

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.

The biggest gain I'd say to using the combined version is that you won't need Java on your machine.

I'm going to switch my public node to using the combined version, see if it helps.

M

I see that you changed your pool to Matt's fork (python included) as well. Did you try to use your extended node status and found that it did not work? I too have seen an improvement as others with Matt's fork but lost the ability to run a parallel version. I am really asking to verify that it is not just me? This is by no means a discredit to Matt's efforts as the loss of a "pretty" display does not take away from the improved performance.

Not sure what you mean by extended node status?

I still have a pretty display, as far as I can tell.  Not the best, but better than the default.

M
I can't get anything but the default to work, I built the node twice to make sure I did not do something wrong but it does not seem to pull the data in. I must be missing something. When I access the non-default front end it shows up on the web but does not display any data, it worked before this build. Well I would rather let it run than waste the time to playing with another front end.

All I did was:

- rename my existing p2pool folder
- git clone the fork
- move the data folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one
- move/copy the webstatic folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one

And of course modified my startup script for p2pool to use the relay code.

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.
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


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


View Profile WWW
August 31, 2014, 07:50:01 PM
 #10494


All I did was:

- rename my existing p2pool folder
- git clone the fork
- move the data folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one
- move/copy the webstatic folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one

And of course modified my startup script for p2pool to use the relay code.

M

Same here, no problems at all.

"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/
Duce
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 07:58:33 PM
 #10495


All I did was:

- rename my existing p2pool folder
- git clone the fork
- move the data folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one
- move/copy the webstatic folder from the old p2pool folder to the new one

And of course modified my startup script for p2pool to use the relay code.

M

Same here, no problems at all.
Wow thanks guys, I didn't think about just copying the old web-static folder over but relied on just making a new one. I did rename the existing p2pool folder so I do have the old files. That was easy, thanks again!
hamburgerhelper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 08:16:23 PM
 #10496

Nice to see Matt being so responsive to the folks who are Java-averse. That's the way you build a user base!

Has anyone who ran p2pool + RelayNodeClient.jar compared the resource utilization with the 100% python version (Matt's fork of p2pool)? I'm interested in either a decrease in RAM or CPU utilization. I've been running the Java client on 2GB of RAM w/2 CPUs and haven't noticed trouble. I'm looking for some hard data to convince me that the switch to pure python is worth it.

Thanks for helping me be lazy and still run a bitchin p2pool node.
Matt Corallo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 751


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 09:08:16 PM
 #10497

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.
The only thing I can think of is that, because Python is single-threaded in practice (both pypy and CPython have this global lock (the GIL) and they run multiple threads which contend for it, actually decreasing performance over just running a single thread and multiplexing between them....), you may end up in a situation where you're waiting for the relay network thread to finish processing something, but because all of its processing is incredibly light-weight, I highly doubt it would make more than a few nanoseconds difference.

Bitcoin Ubuntu PPA maintainer - donate to me personally: 1JBMattRztKDF2KRS3vhjJXA7h47NEsn2c
http://bitcoinrelaynetwork.org maintainer
PGP ID: 07DF 3E57 A548 CCFB 7530  7091 89BB B866 3E2E65CE
Matt Corallo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 751


View Profile
August 31, 2014, 09:09:11 PM
 #10498

Nice results on the RelayNode mod... But how does it compare to having the standalone java node and p2pool instance versus the combined python implementation?  Pros/cons? Would pypy execution make any appreciable difference for the modified p2pool instance? 

Right now I'm running the mainline p2pool via pypy and Matt's java Relay separately and it's functioning fine, so I'm interested if there would be any gain to switch to the combined implementation.
The only thing I can think of is that, because Python is single-threaded in practice (both pypy and CPython have this global lock (the GIL) and they run multiple threads which contend for it, actually decreasing performance over just running a single thread and multiplexing between them....), you may end up in a situation where you're waiting for the relay network thread to finish processing something, but because all of its processing is incredibly light-weight, I highly doubt it would make more than a few nanoseconds difference.
Of course if you dont already have a physical CPU core spare running the Java version, you probably save on process context switching anyway...

Bitcoin Ubuntu PPA maintainer - donate to me personally: 1JBMattRztKDF2KRS3vhjJXA7h47NEsn2c
http://bitcoinrelaynetwork.org maintainer
PGP ID: 07DF 3E57 A548 CCFB 7530  7091 89BB B866 3E2E65CE
kgb2mining
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 01, 2014, 01:40:34 AM
 #10499

I'm not very sure on the CPU overhead - I have a 16-core machine and honestly it didn't break a sweat before and isn't now.  However, java introduced about a 2.5GB RAM overhead which is completely gone now when using the pure-python version.

I'll just echo what PatMan said - even if there's no real gain performance-wise between the two, there is definitely a maintenance overhead gain with everything now streamlined and that is enough for me.  I don't need to worry about the java process on its own, don't have to worry on reboots or scripting it up to restart, etc.  It's all happy under one roof.

Yesterday I was tinkering around with adding peering nodes and I think I tinkered too much, my efficiency never got back above 100%.  I fixed most of what I was doing and since restart about 12 hours ago I have 7/0/0 shares and 110%+ efficiency again.  GBT is hovering around .16-.18 on average, memory usage is small at around 500MB, and my bandwith usage is only around 50KB/s.
hamburgerhelper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83


View Profile
September 01, 2014, 03:19:55 AM
 #10500

Thanks for the info kgb2mining.

It looks like the java version is using about 70 MB of RAM and 0.2% CPU. Since I already have the startup scripts, and upgrading is so simple, I think I'll just keep running the java version. It gives me some flexibility when it comes to upgrading (like, I can just upgrade the RelayNodeClient without restarting p2pool).

Interesting about your p2pool peer experimentation. Would you mind sharing your peer list? Has anyone found that there is an optimal number of peers? Several of these peers are gone now, but here's my list:

-n p2pool.org
-n minefast.coincadence.com
-n 14.17.121.234
-n 58.22.92.36
-n 115.201.192.188
-n 125.126.130.134
-n 107.170.178.16
-n 50.251.148.42
-n 115.202.27.30
-n 182.41.211.14
-n 50.248.204.210
-n 192.71.218.197
-n 107.170.116.123
-n 173.160.157.222
-n 82.196.8.44
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 ... 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!