Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 01:49:40 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 ... 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 [626] 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2035748 times)
tomsanders
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 111


View Profile
April 22, 2015, 09:55:44 PM
 #12501

Link to the P2Pool Node list?
1481464180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481464180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481464180
Reply with quote  #2

1481464180
Report to moderator
1481464180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481464180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481464180
Reply with quote  #2

1481464180
Report to moderator
1481464180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481464180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481464180
Reply with quote  #2

1481464180
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 22, 2015, 10:10:14 PM
 #12502

Code:
Local: 1946GH/s in last 5.8 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~37.2% (35-39%) Expected time to share: 4.0 hours
Why is my "Local dead on arrival" so high?

Update: It just now improved:
Code:
Local: 2017GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~1.8% (1-4%) Expected time to share: 3.8 hours
Was it just "adjusting" or something?

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
tomsanders
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 111


View Profile
April 22, 2015, 10:14:46 PM
 #12503

I may sound a little dumb for writing this.... with the p2p pool are you your own "private" pool e.g you keep the entire 25BTC apart from a little fee or is it a very big mining pool and you are supporting the pool by having your own node close to you? Im guess then the 25BTC would be then shared?

Thanks
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
April 22, 2015, 10:48:45 PM
 #12504

I may sound a little dumb for writing this.... with the p2p pool are you your own "private" pool e.g you keep the entire 25BTC apart from a little fee or is it a very big mining pool and you are supporting the pool by having your own node close to you? Im guess then the 25BTC would be then shared?

Thanks

The 25BTC is shared throughout all of the p2pool network. It's like a distributed pool, where you mine off your own node (or a public node) with the advantages that can give you (zero latency if you run it local to your miners) but you also benefit from sharing hash power with the rest of the p2pool network to reduce variance.

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
April 22, 2015, 11:34:19 PM
 #12505

I believe there's also work being done to use the proxy to be able to balance miner hashrate.  The idea being there to try to mitigate the effects of "swamping" a node if a large miner comes onto a node with a lot of smaller miners, they could be proxied to a different node where their hashrate is more appropriate.

I've been away a year so maybe you are referring to something else, but if you are talking about small miners having their difficulty targets skyrocket when a large miner joins the same public p2pool node, that is avoided with this pull request:

https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/pull/174

Basically, it assigns difficulty targets to miners based on their payment address instead of the total hash rate of the local node. This way the difficulty target your miner is working on is identical to running your own private node, even if some other far larger miner is on the same public node with you. This is for the true difficulty target to get shares, a different pull request was submitted related to pseduo-shares.

Just been checking out ckpool and ckproxy, I think those came out after I left, quite cool. I'd have been all over ckproxy if I knew about it back then. I attempted to learn enough Haskell to run proxypool with p2pool for BTC mining, but it wasn't worth the pain. Smiley

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
April 23, 2015, 02:15:50 AM
 #12506

Maybe p2pool could consider some (more complex) version of that in the share chain to force miners to use a diff related to their hash rate and thus allow smaller miners to reduce their variance.

Been looking around the past month of posts and saw this. I think I recall a conversation once that it'd be nice to scale the difficulty target for miners to target some preferred # of shares in the sharechain. It does this already in some regard as I think there's a cap the target for a hash rate can't be so low that you'll find more than 5% of the full share chain's % of shares on average. (Going by memory and haven't touched p2pool since last April.) However that's realistically way too high. For low variance payouts for a large miner, you only need to keep a few shares in the chain at all times. This is a reason "friendly" large miners could use /DIFF to kick their difficulty targets way higher... they'd have less shares in the share chain (leaving more room for smaller people and reducing their variance), but the shares they do have are worth that much more during payout.

Actually I used google and spent some time trying to find what I'm thinking of. I did. It's here, the bottom portion of this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg4830990#msg4830990

with small followup:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg4831519#msg4831519

What I provided was a different way to calculate target difficulties for large miners such that they'd always have shares in the sharechain (amount of payment would vary, but they'd almost never miss a payment totally). For large miners it might drop the # of shares in the sharechain they were gobbling up by a factor of 10-15. Which means the sharechain difficulty is lower, making it easier for smaller miners to find shares.

Of course it has the problem of abuse by larger miners splitting up their 'farm' to multiple addresses and thus acting like multiple smaller miners - so that would have to be resolved some way I've got no idea how Smiley

It wouldn't be in a large miner's financial interest to push out/hurt smaller miners. Just makes p2pool network speed lower for everyone. Granted, the community is full of vandals though.

Edit: Correction, the hard code in p2pool was to make a miner's minimum difficulty target even if they said /1 to be such that they can only find 1.67% of the total share chain's shares. This is far too many shares for 1 miner to have, of course...

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
bhanu545
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 170


View Profile
April 23, 2015, 02:18:49 AM
 #12507

Very excited about the blocks we have been finding lately...



Not so excited about the frequency of 0 transaction blocks....

If your "that guy" please PM me, I'll keep your identity private, and may be able to help you make your node more efficient and include some transactions in your blocks as well.

0 transaction blocks reflect poorly on our community, and with current transaction volume slow down the whole network.

Do you mean zero transaction blocks bring no extra transaction fee with block reward when it is found? and will the transaction fee be shared to all miners or only block founder?
How do you insert transactions in blocks? any reference to shed some light about this concept?
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
April 23, 2015, 01:02:45 PM
 #12508

Very excited about the blocks we have been finding lately...

...img snipped...

Not so excited about the frequency of 0 transaction blocks....

If your "that guy" please PM me, I'll keep your identity private, and may be able to help you make your node more efficient and include some transactions in your blocks as well.

0 transaction blocks reflect poorly on our community, and with current transaction volume slow down the whole network.

Do you mean zero transaction blocks bring no extra transaction fee with block reward when it is found? and will the transaction fee be shared to all miners or only block founder?
How do you insert transactions in blocks? any reference to shed some light about this concept?
Zero transaction blocks (well, technically they're reported as 1 transaction because of the block reward distribution) have zero transaction fees.  How could they have any fees since there are no transactions in the block?  In a block that actually does have transactions - like that last one p2pool found 353366 - there were 0.02990026BTC of fees.  Those fees are combined with the 25BTC block reward and distributed to all miners according to the shares the miners have on the payout list.

The transactions are inserted into the block by the node on which you're mining.  Each node runs its own copy of the Bitcoin Core.  If a node has setup their configuration to do something like setting a max block size of 10kb, or their mintxfee to something like 100BTC, then if they happen to find a share that satisfies the network difficulty the chances are exceptionally good the block will contain no transactions other than the block reward.

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.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
April 23, 2015, 01:17:15 PM
 #12509

...
Of course it has the problem of abuse by larger miners splitting up their 'farm' to multiple addresses and thus acting like multiple smaller miners - so that would have to be resolved some way I've got no idea how Smiley

It wouldn't be in a large miner's financial interest to push out/hurt smaller miners. Just makes p2pool network speed lower for everyone. Granted, the community is full of vandals though.

Edit: Correction, the hard code in p2pool was to make a miner's minimum difficulty target even if they said /1 to be such that they can only find 1.67% of the total share chain's shares. This is far too many shares for 1 miner to have, of course...

So basically what you are saying is that people with more mining power will be happy to have MUCH higher difficulty than p2pool's already very high difficulty, so that others can have lower difficulty, and thus people with more mining power will also have higher variance than most people mining on p2pool so the others can all have lower variance?
Unfortunately "people will do what is best for others at their own detriment" usually doesn't pan out too well.

In fact there's a very obvious example with the recent blocks where 2 were mined by people who put almost no transactions in them.
No transactions confirmed is bad for bitcoin in general, but anyone short sighted may well only care about the BTC reward and not the bitcoin network ... or p2pool's reputation.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
April 23, 2015, 05:41:18 PM
 #12510

So basically what you are saying is that people with more mining power will be happy to have MUCH higher difficulty than p2pool's already very high difficulty, so that others can have lower difficulty, and thus people with more mining power will also have higher variance than most people mining on p2pool so the others can all have lower variance?
Unfortunately "people will do what is best for others at their own detriment" usually doesn't pan out too well.

Yeah maybe I'm being naïve. Don't know. It just doesn't seem like the largest miners need to have potentially 150 shares in the share chain at a given time, when they could have 15 shares worth 10x as much instead. There isn't a real 'detriment' here as you'll still earn the same amount of income on average.

Also a big miner shouldn't view p2pool share difficulty as "very high".

I don't have the math to come up with a confidence interval on the # of shares someone will have in the share chain for a given hash power off the top of my head. However, for sake of example, lets say the huge miner with 150 share on average has high confidence to be in the 130-170 range. Likewise, if his diff target was ten times higher, he'd be 13-17 with 15 on average. If each share of normal difficulty paid out .01 BTC for simplicity (.1 BTC for the 10x higher target shares), then his income averages 150 * .01 or 15 * .1, 1.5 BTC either way. The question is if the steps within this range are steps of .01 BTC each or .1 BTC each.

When I used to run sha256 alt coin p2pool nodes and would mine on them with my S1, I'd set /DIFF as high as I could to not shut out GPU miners. I know, few people likely do that in the p2pool BTC world, which is why it makes more sense for p2pool to automatically scale the vardiff beyond just minimizing network traffic and be smart regarding the fact the sharechain is a fixed size.

I guess my point is the # of shares in the sharechain is a resource that needs to be managed as intelligently as possible for the health of the network. For each big miner with 100+ shares in the chain at any one time, there will be far more miners struggling to keep just 1 share active at all times.

Edit: On a sidenote I sent an email to windpath with various old links and github patches in case he wants to apply some nice front end improvements from last year. It seems p2pool-node-status went quiet before they moved from -devel to the normal branch, and the alt coins that also used the interface all faded away. So the cool improvements to show things like estimated time per share and miner-specific difficulty targets have been forgotten to the sands of time. Smiley

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
April 23, 2015, 07:58:19 PM
 #12511

interesting ...  Grin


French ... but not so much   ---===---   P2P ... it's people at the end   ---===---   P2Pool (10,9 GH/s).
Comment miner des bitcoins ? Un tutoriel est là : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1114415.0
Bitcoin change everything ... an explain of this fact : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joITmEr4SjY
Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 04:51:05 AM
 #12512

Code:
Local: 1946GH/s in last 5.8 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~37.2% (35-39%) Expected time to share: 4.0 hours
Why is my "Local dead on arrival" so high?

Update: It just now improved:
Code:
Local: 2017GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~1.8% (1-4%) Expected time to share: 3.8 hours
Was it just "adjusting" or something?
Update: p2pool casuse my S5 to lock up after a certain amount of time! Why?
I don't get this problem with Eligius pool. Also, I get much higher hashrates with Eligius, which seems strange to me.

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
tomsanders
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 111


View Profile
April 24, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
 #12513

Anyone know why im getting this fault?

user@ubuntu:~$ bitcoin-cli getblockcount
error: {"code":-28,"message":"Verifying blocks..."}


Thanks


Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 07:14:56 AM
 #12514

Anyone know why im getting this fault?

user@ubuntu:~$ bitcoin-cli getblockcount
error: {"code":-28,"message":"Verifying blocks..."}


Thanks



That's what it does when bitcoind or bitcoin-qt first starts up.

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
tomsanders
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 111


View Profile
April 24, 2015, 07:19:40 AM
 #12515

Anyone know why im getting this fault?

user@ubuntu:~$ bitcoin-cli getblockcount
error: {"code":-28,"message":"Verifying blocks..."}


Thanks



That's what it does when bitcoind or bitcoin-qt first starts up.

Nothing to be concerned about then?

Thanks
Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 01:24:34 PM
 #12516

Code:
Local: 1946GH/s in last 5.8 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~37.2% (35-39%) Expected time to share: 4.0 hours
Why is my "Local dead on arrival" so high?

Update: It just now improved:
Code:
Local: 2017GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~1.8% (1-4%) Expected time to share: 3.8 hours
Was it just "adjusting" or something?
Update: p2pool casuse my S5 to lock up after a certain amount of time! Why?
I don't get this problem with Eligius pool. Also, I get much higher hashrates with Eligius, which seems strange to me.

Update #3:
I corrected this issue by (1) making each of my miners mine to a separate user and (2) adding these options to `cgminer`:
--queue 0 --failover-only --expiry 1 --scan-time 1

Are these good settings?

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 01:27:57 PM
 #12517

Anyone know why im getting this fault?

user@ubuntu:~$ bitcoin-cli getblockcount
error: {"code":-28,"message":"Verifying blocks..."}


Thanks



That's what it does when bitcoind or bitcoin-qt first starts up.

Nothing to be concerned about then?

Thanks
No, that's normal behavior. Once it's finishing verifying blocks, you will then be able to issue RPC calls just fine.

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 02:59:06 PM
 #12518

Code:
Local: 1946GH/s in last 5.8 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~37.2% (35-39%) Expected time to share: 4.0 hours
Why is my "Local dead on arrival" so high?

Update: It just now improved:
Code:
Local: 2017GH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~1.8% (1-4%) Expected time to share: 3.8 hours
Was it just "adjusting" or something?
Update: p2pool casuse my S5 to lock up after a certain amount of time! Why?
I don't get this problem with Eligius pool. Also, I get much higher hashrates with Eligius, which seems strange to me.

Update #3:
I corrected this issue by (1) making each of my miners mine to a separate user and (2) adding these options to `cgminer`:
--queue 0 --failover-only --expiry 1 --scan-time 1

Are these good settings?

The queue setting is the one that will make the difference.  The others won't help you.  Also, you should use --submit-stale since by default the cgminer binaries in the Ants all throw away stale work, which is a very bad thing for p2pool.

I'm not sure if kano/ck have built a cgminer binary for the S5... if they have, then I'd suggest using theirs.

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.
Geremia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 445


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 08:27:19 PM
 #12519

The queue setting is the one that will make the difference.  The others won't help you.  Also, you should use --submit-stale since by default the cgminer binaries in the Ants all throw away stale work, which is a very bad thing for p2pool.
Okay, thanks; I'll try "--submit-stale" and see if that improves things.
Update: It appears `cgminer` doesn't have a "--submit-stale" option. I think my S5s build (and ck's, too) submits stales by default because there is a "--no-submit-stale" option.
I'm not sure if kano/ck have built a cgminer binary for the S5... if they have, then I'd suggest using theirs.
Yes, he does: http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s5/4.9.0-150105/cgminer

However, ck's version doesn't have a "--btc-address" option for solo mining. Is there a way to solo-mine with ck's version?

Update: Wow, I'm getting up to 2.54 Thash/s (as reported by P2Pool) with two S5s and ck's cgminer 4.9. Thank you, jonnybravo0311!

BTC tip jar | my BTC wiki, BTC StackExchange, Twister posts, & Keybase pages | Tox ID: 65C3E8810738AD9D175234808FCB317A1103632903436203D45411AE97C03F547D390A76B3CF
Join Coinbase. | The best, free book on Bitcoin: Mastering Bitcoin
Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
 #12520

The queue setting is the one that will make the difference.  The others won't help you.  Also, you should use --submit-stale since by default the cgminer binaries in the Ants all throw away stale work, which is a very bad thing for p2pool.
Okay, thanks; I'll try "--submit-stale" and see if that improves things.
Update: It appears `cgminer` doesn't have a "--submit-stale" option. I think my S5s build (and ck's, too) submits stales by default because there is a "--no-submit-stale" option.
I'm not sure if kano/ck have built a cgminer binary for the S5... if they have, then I'd suggest using theirs.
Yes, he does: http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s5/4.9.0-150105/cgminer

However, ck's version doesn't have a "--btc-address" option for solo mining. Is there a way to solo-mine with ck's version?

Update: Wow, I'm getting up to 2.54 Thash/s (as reported by P2Pool) with two S5s and ck's cgminer 4.9. Thank you, jonnybravo0311!
If you're going to solo mine, just point the miners to solo.ckpool.org.  Not really worth trying to solo mine directly to the coin daemon, so there's really no need for the --btc-address parameter.  If you really want to do it yourself, then you'd be better off setting up your own instance of ckpool; however, unless you're well connected you run a high risk of submitting an orphaned block, and seeing that 25BTC go down the drain would really suck.

I swear I read from ck/kano that the Bitmaintech fork of cgminer tossed stale work... and that was one of the reasons to use the binary from them instead of Bitmain's.

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.
Pages: « 1 ... 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 [626] 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 ... 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!