Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 02:28:45 AM *
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 ... 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] 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032613 times)
LevinSwe
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
April 26, 2016, 05:26:35 PM
 #14521

Hi,

I think the key is to create (more) public nodes with a great user interface, maybe public nodes should run the same or similar interface? And one thing the user want is a graph of your own Hashrate.
At my node I run the "johndoe75 interface" (//213.66.205.194:9332), if it would be possible to klick on your "adress" to se a graph on your Hashrate. Add somewhere to klick for se the old list of all users payout?
Create nodes that run the webpage on port:80 instead of 9332.. ? is it possible? and then use port:9332 for miners.?

I have tested to run p2pool on one server and the bitcoinqt on another, but it did not work? the p2pool does not need much power to run but the qt needs lot of power to generate the blocktemplate quick. now i'm running the node on a core-i7 3,6ghz*8core + intel PCIE SSD and the time to generate the template is ~300ms. to slow.. ?
<--edit, by default in bitcoin core setting "rpcallowip=127.0.0.1" is set, by adding "rpcallowip=213.66.205.194" it is possible to use a remote bitcoin node for several p2pool nodes... but if the btc node is down.. all the p2 nodes is down...
--/>


One great thing with public p2pool nodes is the lazy users do not even need to create a user account. And u can mint on different node servers with the same "username" (Payout adress).

Best regards
Magnus
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481164125
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481164125

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481164125
Reply with quote  #2

1481164125
Report to moderator
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
April 27, 2016, 11:01:07 PM
 #14522


Unfortunately the issues remain the same as they've always been and the suggestions for how to get more people to use p2pool haven't changed in years but none of that is working. I don't see a revolutionary way out of this predicament unless it's totally redesigned. Alas I don't think anyone has solutions for the existing design even if they were to start from scratch again.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
April 28, 2016, 11:11:04 AM
 #14523



That image is priceless!

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470



View Profile
April 28, 2016, 12:49:57 PM
 #14524


Why would this not work:

p2pool spontaneously splits itself into separated sharechains in sympathy with it's overall market share, with the objective of keeping the share difficulty as low as possible on one chain. That way, the pool can expand beyond that stage where the share variance becomes too high for entry level miners. Which pool a miner is assigned to at any given time is random, to the extent that the practicalities of competitive pooled mining need observing (healthy range of hashrates within a given sub-pool, sensible minimum time hashing on a given chain, etc).

I understand that larger miners could try to game that system, but there is a limit to how many controllers with their own NIC and/or the number of VM's running through each, the amount of work required, and the various extra overheads needed, I can't see large miners exploiting that to any significant extent. It's more productive to concentrate your resources on simply improving as a solo miner, not trying to fight with the lesser fauna.

Vires in numeris
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
April 28, 2016, 10:21:27 PM
 #14525

Why would this not work:

p2pool spontaneously splits itself into separated sharechains in sympathy with it's overall market share, with the objective of keeping the share difficulty as low as possible on one chain. That way, the pool can expand beyond that stage where the share variance becomes too high for entry level miners. Which pool a miner is assigned to at any given time is random, to the extent that the practicalities of competitive pooled mining need observing (healthy range of hashrates within a given sub-pool, sensible minimum time hashing on a given chain, etc).

I understand that larger miners could try to game that system, but there is a limit to how many controllers with their own NIC and/or the number of VM's running through each, the amount of work required, and the various extra overheads needed, I can't see large miners exploiting that to any significant extent. It's more productive to concentrate your resources on simply improving as a solo miner, not trying to fight with the lesser fauna.

Can two or more sharechains with different share difficulties be merged such that a block find on one carries rewards through on the other(s)? I ask because I do not know. Smiley

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
LevinSwe
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
April 29, 2016, 07:20:06 AM
 #14526

Bitminter have a "Pay/Hour at 1 TH/s" column at their Shifts page. So i calculated my pay/h of the latest block (409346). = 0.234mBTC per 1TH/h. (@9Th)
Bitminters last record say 0.19471mBTC, but there are higher and super low values like 0.0000...

The image with the dead horse.. mja I can't see that p2pool is dead...
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470



View Profile
April 29, 2016, 10:14:07 AM
 #14527

Why would this not work:

p2pool spontaneously splits itself into separated sharechains in sympathy with it's overall market share, with the objective of keeping the share difficulty as low as possible on one chain. That way, the pool can expand beyond that stage where the share variance becomes too high for entry level miners. Which pool a miner is assigned to at any given time is random, to the extent that the practicalities of competitive pooled mining need observing (healthy range of hashrates within a given sub-pool, sensible minimum time hashing on a given chain, etc).

I understand that larger miners could try to game that system, but there is a limit to how many controllers with their own NIC and/or the number of VM's running through each, the amount of work required, and the various extra overheads needed, I can't see large miners exploiting that to any significant extent. It's more productive to concentrate your resources on simply improving as a solo miner, not trying to fight with the lesser fauna.

Can two or more sharechains with different share difficulties be merged such that a block find on one carries rewards through on the other(s)? I ask because I do not know. Smiley

Ah, that's an important detail, and I ought to have thought about that previously....

If manual hopping between sub-chains is not possible, then from the low-block-variance perspective, it makes sense to split the block reward between all chains, but that would not necessarily scale up (all clients would need all copies of all sharechains they were not mining.... B/W requirements are low for one p2pool sharechain, but I'm not sure if multiples of that number is feasible).


So, a low variance model would split the reward between all sharechains, but would likely sacrifice ultimate scaling. Independent rewards for each sharechain could scale up well, but the variance would be similar to best-case scenario for p2pool currently. Perhaps the latter (also simpler) method would be the best compromise (and satisfies the basic objective of redesigning p2pool in any case).

Vires in numeris
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
April 29, 2016, 10:47:52 AM
 #14528

The image with the dead horse.. mja I can't see that p2pool is dead...

The dead horse is the topic of how to grow p2pool not p2pool itself.

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
nicklello
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 119


View Profile
April 30, 2016, 09:21:43 PM
 #14529

The image with the dead horse.. mja I can't see that p2pool is dead...

The dead horse is the topic of how to grow p2pool not p2pool itself.

Quite honestly I don't know why anyone takes notice of someone who has a vested interest in p2pool failing completely; remember CK takes a percentage of any money earned on his proprietery ckpool platform.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
May 01, 2016, 01:13:00 AM
 #14530

The image with the dead horse.. mja I can't see that p2pool is dead...

The dead horse is the topic of how to grow p2pool not p2pool itself.

Quite honestly I don't know why anyone takes notice of someone who has a vested interest in p2pool failing completely; remember CK takes a percentage of any money earned on his proprietery ckpool platform.

Incorrect.

Just like how forrestv gets a % of every p2pool block mined if the miners allow it,
-ck gets a % of every ckpool block mined, only if the pools allows it.

Both p2pool and ckpool are open source.

The proprietary ownership of ckpool by -ck is only at the same level as forrestv's proprietary ownership of p2pool.
Both are GPL

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
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 01, 2016, 10:30:49 AM
 #14531

Quite honestly I don't know why anyone takes notice of someone who has a vested interest in p2pool failing completely; remember CK takes a percentage of any money earned on his proprietery ckpool platform.

@nicklello  How are you making that connection? p2pool is not even a significant competitor to the pools that run ck's and kano's software.

Quite honestly I don't know why anyone takes notice of someone who has a vested interest in p2pool failing completely; remember CK takes a percentage of any money earned on his proprietery ckpool platform.

Incorrect.

Just like how forrestv gets a % of every p2pool block mined if the miners allow it,
-ck gets a % of every ckpool block mined, only if the pools allows it.

Both p2pool and ckpool are open source.

The proprietary ownership of ckpool by -ck is only at the same level as forrestv's proprietary ownership of p2pool.
Both are GPL

I think kano makes a good point, not that he or ck need any defending.

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
nicklello
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 119


View Profile
May 03, 2016, 09:12:47 AM
 #14532

GUYS

You seem to be forgetting that this is a forum for discussing p2pool; not for promoting other pools or constantly poking holes in p2pool and it's low hashrate.

Something that would *really* help would be for competitors to p2pool (which is a minnow against the Goliaths such as CKPool) to keep off this discussion group.

I know p2pool node operators have a choice on how much they donate to forrestv...

BUT where do CKPool users have a choice on how much they 'donate' in fees ?
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2016, 10:32:52 AM
 #14533

BUT where do CKPool users have a choice on how much they 'donate' in fees ?
You're confusing the ckpool software which kano was talking about with kano's kano.is ckpool. But now we're way off topic.
To make it on topic, note I have on numerous occasions suggested ckpool can be used as an intermediary to make part of p2pool scale better, but that adds yet another layer of complexity to setting up p2pool.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 05, 2016, 10:41:57 AM
 #14534

Are there any major issues with switching a p2pool node to Bitcoin Classic?

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
May 05, 2016, 03:43:21 PM
 #14535

Are there any major issues with switching a p2pool node to Bitcoin Classic?

You need to change the block version in the P2Pool source code, it's line 372 in work.py, to:

Code:
version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x30000000),

or

Code:
version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 805306368),

Both work.

in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 06, 2016, 05:50:26 AM
 #14536

Are there any major issues with switching a p2pool node to Bitcoin Classic?

You need to change the block version in the P2Pool source code, it's line 372 in work.py, to:

Code:
version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x30000000),

or

Code:
version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 805306368),

Both work.

Got it. It wants the same thing either in hexadecimal or decimal.

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 09, 2016, 05:03:32 PM
 #14537

I recompiled bitcoind with the --disable-wallet option on my node. I know p2pool definitely requires the -a or --address command when running with no wallet and is a good practice to use generally, but does it need any other options to run without a wallet?

What exactly do the -i or --numaddresses and the -t or --timeaddresses options do?

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
May 09, 2016, 06:44:53 PM
 #14538

I recompiled bitcoind with the --disable-wallet option on my node. I know p2pool definitely requires the -a or --address command when running with no wallet and is a good practice to use generally, but does it need any other options to run without a wallet?

What exactly do the -i or --numaddresses and the -t or --timeaddresses options do?

They are for dynamic addresses using bitcoin wallet and not required when you use -a or -address

numaddresses is the size of the new adress pool maintained, default 2
timeaddresses is how long to use an address before geting a new one, default is 2 days

in2tactics
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 09, 2016, 09:39:56 PM
 #14539

I recompiled bitcoind with the --disable-wallet option on my node. I know p2pool definitely requires the -a or --address command when running with no wallet and is a good practice to use generally, but does it need any other options to run without a wallet?

What exactly do the -i or --numaddresses and the -t or --timeaddresses options do?

They are for dynamic addresses using bitcoin wallet and not required when you use -a or -address

numaddresses is the size of the new adress pool maintained, default 2
timeaddresses is how long to use an address before geting a new one, default is 2 days

I thought as much. The documentation for the -a or --address option stated "generate payouts to this address (default: <address requested from bitcoind>), or (dynamic)" and it was not clear to me that the -i or --numaddresses and the -t or --timeaddresses options were directly tied to the -a or --address option when operating under the default behavior. Thank you for the clarification/confirmation.

Are there any advantages, speed or otherwise, to using or not using a wallet with bitcoind for p2pool?

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN, 4x AntMiner S3, and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Needing RMA (but too lazy)... 2x R9 280x and 2x R7 270x // Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
May 09, 2016, 10:41:15 PM
 #14540

Completely separating the wallet from mining means a few things:
1) The wallet actions don't affect your mining
2) The wallet code in bitcoind can be disabled and thus improve bitcoind performance
3) The contents of your wallet are not accessible from anything that can access your mining
4) Your wallet can be anywhere, separate machine, cold wallet, paper wallet, whatever

In general, keeping a wallet separate from mining is a very good security precaution.
Hiding the mining bitcoind is counter productive to having it distribute blocks quickly,
but limiting all access to a wallet is a good thing Smiley

P.S. never have a wallet bitcoind online in anything that you don't 100% control.
Slush's lesson is a good lesson to learn regarding that ... a few years ago 10's of 1000's of BTC in his pool wallets on linode were taken by someone with access in linode through the back door that they purposely had in their system ... ... ...

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 ... 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] 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 »
  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!