Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 12:31:54 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 ... 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] 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2029437 times)
jonnybravo0311
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 06:24:11 PM
 #13821

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....


We actually had this discussion almost word for word previously Smiley.  I'm right there with you... all I've gotten is a few lumps on the head from bumping it so many times.  The idea of a side chain is interesting, but nobody's been able to come up with a way to implement it.  OgNasty and Nonnakip have done the closest thing to a solution with their NastyPoP method (ckpool combined with p2pool).  It's a decent workaround, but it's not ideal.  I've been mining on it for a year now, and have my thread comparing the results of it to standard p2pool nodes.  The biggest problem with their solution is that you lose the decentralized nature of p2pool.  Of course, if they expanded their operations from just their two current nodes, so that anyone could operate their own NastyPoP node, then we'd have something workable.

I definitely like what they've done, or I wouldn't have dedicated a year's worth of mining and time to them 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.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480854714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480854714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480854714
Reply with quote  #2

1480854714
Report to moderator
1480854714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480854714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480854714
Reply with quote  #2

1480854714
Report to moderator
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016


Powered by NastyFans


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 06:28:03 PM
 #13822

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.

BITSLER                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016


Powered by NastyFans


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 06:33:23 PM
 #13823

Nonnakip has done the closest thing to a solution with his NastyPoP method (ckpool combined with p2pool).  It's a decent workaround, but it's not ideal.  I've been mining on it for a year now, and have my thread comparing the results of it to standard p2pool nodes.  The biggest problem with their solution is that you lose the decentralized nature of p2pool.  Of course, if they expanded their operations from just their two current nodes, so that anyone could operate their own NastyPoP node, then we'd have something workable.

I definitely like what they've done, or I wouldn't have dedicated a year's worth of mining and time to them Smiley.

The ckpool implementation was actually turned off because it was unstable with our implementation (our use of it wasn't what it was intended for and required a LOT of customization to the code).  We will hopefully be able to stabilize it for our use and implement it again in the future.  There is just a LOT of things nonnakip is working on for NastyFans and the lack of community support on NastyPool has put that project a bit on the back burner.  If more people were interested in it and wanted to participate it might be a different story.  Perhaps if it ever is stable with the ckpool implementation we could open it up to anyone who wants to run a node.  I actually approached the Toomim bros to see if they were interested in hosting a node but I think the centralized nature of our payout system is a bit of a turn off for some folks.  I had hoped that my reputation and only having 1 week of earnings on the line would be enough to ease community concerns, but it appears that it is not.

BITSLER                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
jonnybravo0311
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 06:38:53 PM
 #13824

...but I think the centralized nature of our payout system is a bit of a turn off for some folks.  I had hoped that my reputation and only having 1 week of earnings on the line would be enough to ease community concerns, but it appears that it is not.
I hear you.  And yet, people have no problems throwing their hash at the most centralized pools out there (Ant, Discus, etc).  It really strikes me as paradoxical.  We want decentralization, but we will gladly centralize all of our mining power to get it.  Oh well... I look forward to the stuff Nonnakip is doing.  Keep on fighting the good fight 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.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 08:15:42 PM
 #13825

Repeating this for the maybe 20th time:

I could rewrite it in c but it would cost you a fortune to pay me since I have no interest in doing it for free as I see it as a futile task and would only do it for paid work. The reason is - rewriting p2pool in c would fix its scalability issues but would do nothing for the design of the pool having variance opposite to that of other pools - the larger the pool the MORE the variance instead of what happens at other pools. Unless someone has a design solution for this it would be a waste of time - many many many people have talked and waved their hands lots about this but come up with nothing.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
jonnybravo0311
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 08:30:18 PM
 #13826

I was kind of referring to you -ck when I made my statements above about simply translating from Python to C not solving the inherent problem of the pool.  Sure, a node will be faster and more scalable... heck you'd probably even do something like using multiple threads Tongue... but as you, me, and most everyone else has stated, the real problem is the variance.  Throw 100PH/s on p2pool and see how the share difficulty skyrockets and nobody with under 500TH/s mining is going to have a prayer of getting a share on the chain with any regularity.

Until that is solved, what's the point.  By the way... what is your magic number?  You state, "...it would cost you a fortune to pay me...".  Define fortune 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.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
November 24, 2015, 08:37:00 PM
 #13827

By the way... what is your magic number?  You state, "...it would cost you a fortune to pay me...".  Define fortune Smiley.
Writing in c is very labour intensive (compared to python) so it's a lot of hours work. I charge less for free software than private software since I like to encourage free software use as much as possible. At current exchange rates I charge .29 btc/hr for free soft and .38 for private software. A rough estimate of the time required to rewrite p2pool in c (properly) would be 500 hours work. That's around 150 BTC.

EDIT: By the way this would be a total and utter massive waste of money. Even if all the scalability problems were addressed AND a solution was found for the variance problem, there are no miners left to attract. The sad truth is personal miners are an increasingly irrelevant entity and what little hashrate they have cannot save any small pool. Only farms are relevant today.

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

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 24, 2015, 11:34:59 PM
 #13828

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.
His question was 'could'
The answer is 'Yes'

Any lost blocks will attribute to a lower 'pool luck'.
It's a lost block, it affects what is (incorrectly) referred to as 'pool luck'
So if there have been any (which no one will actually know) then it would have effected the 'p2pool luck'

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
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016


Powered by NastyFans


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2015, 05:05:47 AM
 #13829

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.
His question was 'could'
The answer is 'Yes'

Any lost blocks will attribute to a lower 'pool luck'.
It's a lost block, it affects what is (incorrectly) referred to as 'pool luck'
So if there have been any (which no one will actually know) then it would have effected the 'p2pool luck'

Well, I 'could' manually solve the next two blocks in a row by typing in hashes.  However, I wouldn't go around saying that to people who might not understand the odds.

BITSLER                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 05:59:05 AM
 #13830

Well, I 'could' manually solve the next two blocks in a row by typing in hashes.  However, I wouldn't go around saying that to people who might not understand the odds.

I know the odds, but here the problem is the antminer software and need to solve it.

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.

Can you explain please

By the way... what is your magic number?  You state, "...it would cost you a fortune to pay me...".  Define fortune Smiley.
Writing in c is very labour intensive (compared to python) so it's a lot of hours work. I charge less for free software than private software since I like to encourage free software use as much as possible. At current exchange rates I charge .29 btc/hr for free soft and .38 for private software. A rough estimate of the time required to rewrite p2pool in c (properly) would be 500 hours work. That's around 150 BTC.

EDIT: By the way this would be a total and utter massive waste of money. Even if all the scalability problems were addressed AND a solution was found for the variance problem, there are no miners left to attract. The sad truth is personal miners are an increasingly irrelevant entity and what little hashrate they have cannot save any small pool. Only farms are relevant today.

I am a small miner (3x s5) what should I do? abandon p2pool??!! I hope for a solution ... I will offer 0.29btc for one of your hours when and if it will be necessary, p2pool must not die..

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

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 07:29:10 AM
 #13831

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.
His question was 'could'
The answer is 'Yes'

Any lost blocks will attribute to a lower 'pool luck'.
It's a lost block, it affects what is (incorrectly) referred to as 'pool luck'
So if there have been any (which no one will actually know) then it would have effected the 'p2pool luck'

Well, I 'could' manually solve the next two blocks in a row by typing in hashes.  However, I wouldn't go around saying that to people who might not understand the odds.
Any lost blocks affects 'pool luck'.
Mining with Bitmain firmware versions can lose blocks on p2pool.
Anyone mining with such hardware with this problem is risking losing blocks on p2pool.

Now, if instead you are implying that losing such blocks is rare ... you are mistaken.
95% of stale share blocks on p2pool are valid bitcoin network blocks.
That is the reason why forrestv changed p2pool to submit stale share blocks to bitcoind when we pointed out the problem to him.

How often do these stale share blocks occur?
At least as often as any p2pool blocks that don't appear in the p2pool share chain (Edit: these are the stale share blocks)
The actual number is higher, since as I stated, 95% of stale p2pool share blocks are valid bitcoin network blocks.
It would be even higher if people were mining with bitmain firmware versions throwing away these stale share blocks that are valid bitcoin blocks.

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
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016


Powered by NastyFans


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2015, 08:31:43 AM
 #13832

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?

I think spreading that opinion is damaging to the p2pool project.  Not sure why you would perpetuate that as a realistic cause.  I am not sticking up for Bitmain and I would like to see improved firmware as much as the next guy (submitting stales is obviously an improvement and I believe you are the best person for the job).  I also believe they should be sending you and -ck free units of any hardware that takes advantage of cgminer.  Same goes for Avalon and any others as well.  However, let's be honest.  Stale shares are not the cause for a >50% reduction of luck over the last 30 days.


EDIT:
could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?
The answer is 'Yes'

See what statements like that lead people to believe:

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?
not only S7 but all antminer which is not changed with "ck cgminer".

BITSLER                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
wariner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 852


P2Pool.cloud


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 08:42:06 AM
 #13833

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?

not only S7 but all antminer which is not changed with "ck cgminer".

Quote
However, let's be honest.  Stale shares are not the cause for a >50% reduction of luck over the last 30 days.

Do you have other ideas?

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

my BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 09:23:50 AM
 #13834

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?
...
Where did I say that?

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
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
November 25, 2015, 12:30:00 PM
 #13835

Submitting stale shares can only improve hash rate by 2-3% at most. Can't see that causing the current run of bad luck.

If I had to guess I'd say its team XT and their memory abusing spam attack on core causing orphaned blocks. That combined with increasing difficulty.
BlInK311
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 01:06:49 PM
 #13836

could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?

No.
His question was 'could'
The answer is 'Yes'

Any lost blocks will attribute to a lower 'pool luck'.
It's a lost block, it affects what is (incorrectly) referred to as 'pool luck'
So if there have been any (which no one will actually know) then it would have effected the 'p2pool luck'

Well, I 'could' manually solve the next two blocks in a row by typing in hashes.  However, I wouldn't go around saying that to people who might not understand the odds.

How/where can I submit manual hashes?  That sounds like fun.  After 3 submissions I'm sure I'd give up.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2015, 01:11:32 PM
 #13837

Can you explain please

By the way... what is your magic number?  You state, "...it would cost you a fortune to pay me...".  Define fortune Smiley.
Writing in c is very labour intensive (compared to python) so it's a lot of hours work. I charge less for free software than private software since I like to encourage free software use as much as possible. At current exchange rates I charge .29 btc/hr for free soft and .38 for private software. A rough estimate of the time required to rewrite p2pool in c (properly) would be 500 hours work. That's around 150 BTC.

EDIT: By the way this would be a total and utter massive waste of money. Even if all the scalability problems were addressed AND a solution was found for the variance problem, there are no miners left to attract. The sad truth is personal miners are an increasingly irrelevant entity and what little hashrate they have cannot save any small pool. Only farms are relevant today.

I am a small miner (3x s5) what should I do? abandon p2pool??!! I hope for a solution ... I will offer 0.29btc for one of your hours when and if it will be necessary, p2pool must not die..
I did not say to abandon p2pool in its current form, I just do not see it changing from what it currently is. It is also not my place to recommend you do something else on the p2pool thread.

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

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 01:35:26 PM
 #13838

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?

I think spreading that opinion is damaging to the p2pool project.  Not sure why you would perpetuate that as a realistic cause.  I am not sticking up for Bitmain and I would like to see improved firmware as much as the next guy (submitting stales is obviously an improvement and I believe you are the best person for the job).  I also believe they should be sending you and -ck free units of any hardware that takes advantage of cgminer.  Same goes for Avalon and any others as well.  However, let's be honest.  Stale shares are not the cause for a >50% reduction of luck over the last 30 days.


EDIT:
could this be the cause of the recent bad luck?
The answer is 'Yes'

See what statements like that lead people to believe:

You honestly believe the 'Thirty Day' luck of 46.84% is due to S7 firmware?
not only S7 but all antminer which is not changed with "ck cgminer".
The point of my comment is that indeed using the S7 with crappy firmware can lose blocks and reduce the luck (and payouts)
wariner's comment is correct also - all antminers with crappy firmware versions can lose p2pool blocks and reduce the luck.
Obviously that's "next to" (but not completely) impossible to be the cause of all of the 50% lost luck.
Obviously, however, it can and will affect the luck if lots of people mine with said problematic hardware.

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
jonnybravo0311
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2015, 01:38:48 PM
 #13839

Wow, I think this is the most active this thread has been in months...

Any Antminer that has not been updated to use some version of mainline cgminer will not submit stale shares.  This is bad, because those stale shares can be valid block solutions that p2pool would happily submit.  Kano, where do you get the 95% number you've provided?  Maybe you could provide a definition of a stale share and how cgminer determines if a share is stale as I'm sure people would find the information useful.

@notbatman, I don't think I'd go blaming the XT guys for the run of bad luck.  And you're the second or third person in the past few days to talk about orphaned blocks.  P2Pool has not had an orphaned block since January 7th of this year.  Maybe other pools are having a string of orphans, but that is definitely not the case here.

@BlInK311, you can manually call getblocktemplate, pick a nonce and apply the SHA256 hash to the data.  If you picked correctly, you put that hash into the block template and submit your block.  Good luck!  (Yes, I GROSSLY oversimplified that description).

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: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2015, 01:45:03 PM
 #13840

Wow, I think this is the most active this thread has been in months...

Any Antminer that has not been updated to use some version of mainline cgminer will not submit stale shares.  This is bad, because those stale shares can be valid block solutions that p2pool would happily submit.  Kano, where do you get the 95% number you've provided?  Maybe you could provide a definition of a stale share and how cgminer determines if a share is stale as I'm sure people would find the information useful.

...
p2pool share chain shares average 30s
bitcoin network blocks average 600s
thus 1/20 of stale shares are at the same time as a bitcoin network block change
thus 19/20 of stale shares are not at the same time as a bitcoin network block change
thus 95% of stale p2pool blocks are valid bitcoin network blocks

...
Now, if instead you are implying that losing such blocks is rare ... you are mistaken.
95% of stale share blocks on p2pool are valid bitcoin network blocks.
That is the reason why forrestv changed p2pool to submit stale share blocks to bitcoind when we pointed out the problem to him.

How often do these stale share blocks occur?
At least as often as any p2pool blocks that don't appear in the p2pool share chain (Edit: these are the stale share blocks)
...

Edit: but I should also add, that since a high % of share chain shares are stale (10%?) then that would mean that 10% of blocks found on p2pool would be stale share chain shares
So since 95% of them are actually valid bitcoin network blocks, then that would put the figure around 9.5% of p2pool blocks.

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
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 ... 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!