Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 08:49:24 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 ... 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 [691] 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2034857 times)
AndreyNag
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 01:32:14 PM
 #13801

What Forrest thinks about this situation? His help here is very needed!
All want hear him here.
I think that need rewriting of p2pool sources whith multicore computing support.

 (http://che2pool.mine.nu:9332)
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
1481402964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481402964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481402964
Reply with quote  #2

1481402964
Report to moderator
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 01:35:21 PM
 #13802

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?
Except for Kano's firmware and my drivers for S1-3, all antminer S* cgminer forks from bitmain have the same driver design flaw. We mention it at regular intervals but it keeps getting forgotten or lost in the discussion by p2pool miners...

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 01:39:20 PM
 #13803

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?

.. but it certainly isn't the only one Smiley.

Do you think it's just bad luck or other?

Antminer binaries:   http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/

Bad luck, rising diff, crap firmware, lack of hash power - all of these are contributory factors I'm afraid, although bad luck & high diff affects all pools, not just p2pool.
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 24, 2015, 01:47:03 PM
 #13804


thank you

I have 3 s5 ... you can write me the command ssh for install?

ty

What Forrest thinks about this situation? His help here is very needed!
All want hear him here.
I think that need rewriting of p2pool sources whith multicore computing support.
+1

P2Pool.cloud - Public Node P2Pool EU/AMERICA Bitcoin 0% fee ITA - ENG

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 02:02:07 PM
 #13805


thank you

I have 3 s5 ... you can write me the command ssh for install?

ty


S5 binary install:

Code:
cd /tmp
wget http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s5/4.9.0-150105/cgminer
chmod +x cgminer
mv /usr/bin/cgminer /usr/bin/cgminer.bak
cp cgminer /usr/bin
/etc/init.d/cgminer.sh restart

This is NOT persistent - re-do after reboot.

Or you can use this firmware version:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a3qqhgh3awcrw1i/SD-S5-20150107_cgm_4_9_0-queue_1_submit.tar.gz?dl=0

Which is persistent through reboots.
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 24, 2015, 02:04:52 PM
 #13806

ty but fan go to 100%....normal?

P2Pool.cloud - Public Node P2Pool EU/AMERICA Bitcoin 0% fee ITA - ENG

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 02:07:29 PM
 #13807

ty but fan go to 100%....normal?

Only on startup, then it calms down  Wink otherwise re-do it.
sawa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 559



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 02:28:14 PM
 #13808

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?
Except for Kano's firmware and my drivers for S1-3, all antminer S* cgminer forks from bitmain have the same driver design flaw. We mention it at regular intervals but it keeps getting forgotten or lost in the discussion by p2pool miners...

Maybe does not make sense to do firmware forks for S *, so we are constantly catching up and more and more losing hashrate.
Now it is so small that it can be said that p2pool is dead.
And many of those who get ASICs, can never replace firmware and failing on p2pool they switch to a another type of pools.

Maybe it's time  for develpers to join and modify and adapt it for the new ASICs? Perhaps it's needed to rewrite it on C, as in Python it loads only one core and often on 100%
We need creative solutions, or this topic can be closed and we should stop our nodes and move to antpool, f2pool and etc.

jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 02:29:36 PM
 #13809

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?

.. but it certainly isn't the only one Smiley.

Do you think it's just bad luck or other?
The problem is for ALL Antminers unless you have installed the proper binaries from -ck and kano.  If you are using any other binaries (Bitmain's, some other forks for extranonce, etc) then you do not have the updated code that submits stale shares.  In other words, you are potentially throwing away possible block solutions.

As to your other question regarding luck... yes, I believe it is just poor luck.  We are experiencing normal swings in variance.  As I initially mentioned, S7s are certainly a potential influencing factor since there are no (to my knowledge, -ck/kano can correct me) updated cgminer binaries for it.  However, I don't know how many people currently mining on p2pool are using S7s, so I don't have any reference for how much of an impact it might have 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.
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 02:34:53 PM
 #13810

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?
Except for Kano's firmware and my drivers for S1-3, all antminer S* cgminer forks from bitmain have the same driver design flaw. We mention it at regular intervals but it keeps getting forgotten or lost in the discussion by p2pool miners...

Maybe does not make sense to do firmware forks for S *, so we are constantly catching up and more and more losing hashrate.
Now it is so small that it can be said that p2pool is dead.
And many of those who get ASICs, can never replace firmware and getting out on p2pool they switch to a another type of pools.

Maybe it's time  for develpers to join and modify and adapt it for the new ASICs? Perhaps it's needed to rewrite it on C, as in Python it loads only one core and often on 100%
We need creative solutions, or this topic can be closed and we should stop our nodes and move to antpool, f2pool and similar.
We should absolutely not, in any way, shape or form, EVER move to AntPool or f2pool.  Not only are those pools way too big as it is, but they are also poorly written and take shortcuts that are bad for Bitcoin.  In case you don't remember, they caused a fork in BTC earlier this year precisely because of their shoddy software and mining practices.

As to your other points, we've discussed numerous times rewriting p2pool in a language that can handle multiple threads.  Thus far, nobody's stepped up to take on that challenge.  Even so, rewriting the pool code in C or some other language will not handle the underlying problem of crappy cgminer forks not submitting shares which could be solving blocks.

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.
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 24, 2015, 02:50:41 PM
 #13811

ty but fan go to 100%....normal?

Only on startup, then it calms down  Wink otherwise re-do it.

solved with this
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a3qqhgh3awcrw1i/SD-S5-20150107_cgm_4_9_0-queue_1_submit.tar.gz?dl=0

thank you, and thank you -ck for this version

P2Pool.cloud - Public Node P2Pool EU/AMERICA Bitcoin 0% fee ITA - ENG

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
sawa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 559



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:00:34 PM
 #13812

Runs fine yes, but the bitmain driver throws away what could be potential block solves on p2pool...

the problem is only for s7? or even s5 - s3....?

There is a discussion that contains all modified antminer drivers for p2pool?
Except for Kano's firmware and my drivers for S1-3, all antminer S* cgminer forks from bitmain have the same driver design flaw. We mention it at regular intervals but it keeps getting forgotten or lost in the discussion by p2pool miners...

Maybe does not make sense to do firmware forks for S *, so we are constantly catching up and more and more losing hashrate.
Now it is so small that it can be said that p2pool is dead.
And many of those who get ASICs, can never replace firmware and getting out on p2pool they switch to a another type of pools.

Maybe it's time  for develpers to join and modify and adapt it for the new ASICs? Perhaps it's needed to rewrite it on C, as in Python it loads only one core and often on 100%
We need creative solutions, or this topic can be closed and we should stop our nodes and move to antpool, f2pool and similar.
We should absolutely not, in any way, shape or form, EVER move to AntPool or f2pool.  Not only are those pools way too big as it is, but they are also poorly written and take shortcuts that are bad for Bitcoin.  In case you don't remember, they caused a fork in BTC earlier this year precisely because of their shoddy software and mining practices.
I agree with you, but most people do not understand this.

As to your other points, we've discussed numerous times rewriting p2pool in a language that can handle multiple threads.  Thus far, nobody's stepped up to take on that challenge.  Even so, rewriting the pool code in C or some other language will not handle the underlying problem of crappy cgminer forks not submitting shares which could be solving blocks.
I'm not sure, but why don't we raise funds for the development team that can do this (maybe it's a bad idea).
I think we should act more active rather than passively wait for volunteers.

p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:02:21 PM
 #13813

ty but fan go to 100%....normal?

Only on startup, then it calms down  Wink otherwise re-do it.

solved with this
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a3qqhgh3awcrw1i/SD-S5-20150107_cgm_4_9_0-queue_1_submit.tar.gz?dl=0

thank you, and thank you -ck for this version

This version is not -ck's, but it is using the mainline cgminer.
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:07:16 PM
 #13814


This version is not -ck's, but it is using the mainline cgminer.

ah ok! but fix the problem with p2pool, true?!

P2Pool.cloud - Public Node P2Pool EU/AMERICA Bitcoin 0% fee ITA - ENG

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:09:34 PM
 #13815

I'm not sure, but why don't we raise funds for the development team that can do this (maybe it's a bad idea).
I think we should act more active rather than passively wait for volunteers.

This has also been discussed many times in the past, but finding a coder willing to step up (huge task) as well as people who are willing to donate has proven impossible unfortunately. I've read through this thread many times & it seems some users think that either there is no need for development because it's perfect already, or that it is some kind of crime to even think about it - so nothing happens & miners go elsewhere.

**waits for torrent of abuse**
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 03:16:09 PM
 #13816

I'm not sure, but why don't we raise funds for the development team that can do this (maybe it's a bad idea).
I think we should act more active rather than passively wait for volunteers.

This has also been discussed many times in the past, but finding a coder willing to step up (huge task) as well as people who are willing to donate has proven impossible unfortunately. I've read through this thread many times & it seems some users think that either there is no need for development because it's perfect already, or that it is some kind of crime to even think about it - so nothing happens & miners go elsewhere.

**waits for torrent of abuse**
I don't think it's that people think it's perfect already... it's that people haven't come up with a better way to do it.  A number of ideas have been thrown around, but none solve the problems inherent in the system.  As much as we all want p2pool to represent a larger percentage of the network hash, if it were to do so, then the miners would experience more and more variance as share difficulty rose.  Nobody's been able to come up with a way to manage that, and nobody's willing to simply translate the pool code from python to C.  Heck, windpath even started a bounty months ago to get some work done.  Nobody took him up on the offer.

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.
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:24:04 PM
 #13817

Yeah, I read about that. Unfortunately it seems it's easier/cheaper/less risky for miners just to up & leave instead of being prepared to "chip in" towards a long-term improvement - which at the rate the diff is rising, I can't say I blame them  Sad
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 03:29:46 PM
 #13818

I think the vast majority of miners that leave p2pool do so because they can't deal with the variance.  It's also why pools like AntPool and f2pool continue to grow.  Less variance... regular payouts... regardless of how bad they are for the network.

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.
windpath
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 03:32:08 PM
 #13819

I'm not sure, but why don't we raise funds for the development team that can do this (maybe it's a bad idea).
I think we should act more active rather than passively wait for volunteers.

This has also been discussed many times in the past, but finding a coder willing to step up (huge task) as well as people who are willing to donate has proven impossible unfortunately. I've read through this thread many times & it seems some users think that either there is no need for development because it's perfect already, or that it is some kind of crime to even think about it - so nothing happens & miners go elsewhere.

**waits for torrent of abuse**

I'm not sure this is the case.

There are qualified developers who I have spoken with that are willing to work on P2Pool, and Forrest is still around, if there was a viable proposed solution I would certainly contribute.

The real problem is solving P2Pool's scaleability challenges, and they are hard problems to solve that require inventing a solution.

I've been waiting for almost 2 years to bump my head in the shower and come up with it, but not there yet Wink

If 100 PH/s was pointed to P2Pool today most (if not all) of the existing miners would see a huge spike in variance, and a large reduction in payout.

Share difficulty would skyrocket, and keeping a share on the chain would become very difficult for most of us.

The share chain has a finite amount of space and there is a threshold to prevent dust payments that would not even constitute a transaction fee.

You can only split the 25BTC reward so many ways in a decentralized trust-less environment, and smaller miners will always get squeezed out.

I believe that the solution may lie with sidechains and micro payments where a miner could accrue shares in some type of trust-less sidechain that would be paid out in BTC once a given threshold amount is reached.

This would allow us to increase the size of the share-chain while eliminating dust payouts from the generation transaction.

This technology does not yet exist, but perhaps we are getting closer....


p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
November 24, 2015, 03:43:29 PM
 #13820

It's a tough nut to crack.......
Pages: « 1 ... 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 [691] 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 ... 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!