Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 07:57:14 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 2029109 times)
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
June 21, 2016, 01:59:39 PM
 #14621

If the "expected reward" per 1 diff share falls over time since the last block, then it is hoppable.
If you understand why Prop is hoppable then the above statement should be obvious.

PPLNS has a 'relatively' constant N diff shares, thus the "expected value" of any 1 diff share at any particular time, after the previous block, does not change.
(this of course isn't true over a diff change, but that's out of the context of the issue being brought up)

I can't make head nor tail of your description, but the above is what's relevant, and I imagine is what smooth is saying.
If your payout system does indeed pay a 'relatively' constant N diff shares per block, then it at least doesn't have the obvious Prop issue.

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
1480795034
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795034

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795034
Reply with quote  #2

1480795034
Report to moderator
1480795034
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795034

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795034
Reply with quote  #2

1480795034
Report to moderator
1480795034
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795034

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795034
Reply with quote  #2

1480795034
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 21, 2016, 05:40:47 PM
 #14622

If the "expected reward" per 1 diff share falls over time since the last block, then it is hoppable.
No, we're talking about expected reward given to you by someone else's share. This is a p2pool conversation, not a traditional pool conversation. You have a probability of other people rewarding you in the shares they find after you find your own share. If there are more peer shares that are supposed to reward you, then the size of the reward that each share would give you (should that share also be a block) will be less. The point I have been trying to make is that the expected reward you get for mining a 1-diff share is not dependent on the number of peer shares that your reward is distributed over.

If your payout system does indeed pay a 'relatively' constant N diff shares per block, then it at least doesn't have the obvious Prop issue.
My simulation for the naive PPLNS-on-DAG system gave about 1% typical variation in payouts when the number of shares per level of the DAG varied uniformly between 1 and 10. Note that the variation is not predictable: you can't guess how many shares per level will be mined in the future unless you're actively manipulating it (and large enough to do so). For the PPLKD system, your reward will be split over a constant amount of other people's work, so the variation due to changes in M should be basically 0%.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
June 22, 2016, 12:08:58 AM
 #14623

...
If your payout system does indeed pay a 'relatively' constant N diff shares per block, then it at least doesn't have the obvious Prop issue.
My simulation for the naive PPLNS-on-DAG system gave about 1% typical variation in payouts when the number of shares per level of the DAG varied uniformly between 1 and 10. Note that the variation is not predictable: you can't guess how many shares per level will be mined in the future unless you're actively manipulating it (and large enough to do so). For the PPLKD system, your reward will be split over a constant amount of other people's work, so the variation due to changes in M should be basically 0%.
You mean big enough like you currently are? Smiley

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
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2016, 07:48:14 AM
 #14624

You mean big enough like you currently are? Smiley
Unfortunately, yes.

On that note, I've been meaning to ask other p2poolers what I should do about that, if anything. My nodes currently comprise around 46% of the p2pool hashrate. This means I could perform selfish mining attacks if I wanted to, and if I boosted my hashrate a bit, I could 51% attack the p2pool network and get 100% of the shares. Mostly, this happened because p2pool shrank from 2 PH/s to 0.8 PH/s, not because we grew much. One way of dealing with this issue is that I could take some of my hashrate off of p2pool (and maybe solo mine instead), but that would make p2pool blocks even rarer. (I think my nodes have found the last 4 p2pool blocks.) I could also maybe spread some of my hashrate among other nodes, although this would reduce our revenue. Or we could get more people to mine on p2pool, somehow.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2016, 07:50:41 AM
 #14625

Unfortunately, Bitcoin Classic has not been updated to support CSV and BIP9 yet.
BitcoinXT release F has been tagged. It has BIP9, BIP68, BIP112, and BIP113 support, plus Xthin blocks. As such, it should work fine even after the CSV fork is activated, and should be compatible with p2pool version 16.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/4p7pl3/bitcoin_xt_release_f_has_been_tagged/

Keep in mind that this is based on the 0.11 branch, so performance may be sub-par.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
sawa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 553



View Profile
June 22, 2016, 06:13:24 PM
 #14626

You mean big enough like you currently are? Smiley
Unfortunately, yes.

On that note, I've been meaning to ask other p2poolers what I should do about that, if anything. My nodes currently comprise around 46% of the p2pool hashrate. This means I could perform selfish mining attacks if I wanted to, and if I boosted my hashrate a bit, I could 51% attack the p2pool network and get 100% of the shares. Mostly, this happened because p2pool shrank from 2 PH/s to 0.8 PH/s, not because we grew much. One way of dealing with this issue is that I could take some of my hashrate off of p2pool (and maybe solo mine instead), but that would make p2pool blocks even rarer. (I think my nodes have found the last 4 p2pool blocks.) I could also maybe spread some of my hashrate among other nodes, although this would reduce our revenue. Or we could get more people to mine on p2pool, somehow.
I think, you don't have to do anything. Neither go to other nodes nor remove your hashrates from p2pool. Everyone who wanted to leave have already gone on ckpool and further reduction of hashrate is unlikely. There left those who will never remove their powers from p2pool, and, most likely, will attract other people to join here.

jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2016, 10:09:51 PM
 #14627

Is anyone else having trouble with peer acquisition? vps.forre.st seems to be down.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 23, 2016, 12:05:43 AM
 #14628

Bitcoin Classic 1.1.0 is out. It supports CSV and in my limited testing works fine with p2pool v16.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
ramsis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 23, 2016, 06:57:55 AM
 #14629

You mean big enough like you currently are? Smiley
Unfortunately, yes.

On that note, I've been meaning to ask other p2poolers what I should do about that, if anything. My nodes currently comprise around 46% of the p2pool hashrate. This means I could perform selfish mining attacks if I wanted to, and if I boosted my hashrate a bit, I could 51% attack the p2pool network and get 100% of the shares. Mostly, this happened because p2pool shrank from 2 PH/s to 0.8 PH/s, not because we grew much. One way of dealing with this issue is that I could take some of my hashrate off of p2pool (and maybe solo mine instead), but that would make p2pool blocks even rarer. (I think my nodes have found the last 4 p2pool blocks.) I could also maybe spread some of my hashrate among other nodes, although this would reduce our revenue. Or we could get more people to mine on p2pool, somehow.

Hello! I have p2pool at 10% of capacity throughout its network. And I'm not going to leave him!!! And all that I acquire. I will be adding to p2pool
Since the wire is not one experience comparing pool Kano and p2pool.
I can safely say that those who believe in the fairy tale about the bad pool. Continue to believe in. Many people do not know how to count money. I do not understand how people do not understand this..
Here is a link https://forum.bits.media/index.php?/topic/253-p2pool-detcentralizovannyi-pul/?p=441341, Google translator to help.

The hosts of other pools, well able to hang noodles on the ears!

p/s My English is at the level of Google. So I apologize.
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 23, 2016, 02:13:41 PM
 #14630

I have switched my nodes over to p2pool v16. The current hashrate is approximately 97% v16 over the last hour, and about 76% v16 over the last day. This means that anyone still on v15 will soon have their shares ignored by the rest of the network.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
ramsis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 25, 2016, 10:11:59 AM
 #14631

In Russia we built three nodes. The overall capacity of 400TH/s
By the end of June. We plan to raise up to 500-700TH/s.
astutiumRob
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 195



View Profile WWW
June 25, 2016, 08:27:14 PM
 #14632

P2Pool release 16.0 - commit hash: d3bbd6df33ccedfc15cf941e7ebc6baf49567f97
So, please upgrade to 16.0 now and also tell everyone else to.

Updated our small pool @ http://p2pool.ukbmg.com:9332/static/efe/
and advised the 3 other pools on kit we host to do the same Smiley

www.astutium.com - domains | hosting | vps | servers | cloud - proud to accept bitcoins. UK colocation for BFL and KNC ASICs in Tier3+ DC
Register Domains with BTC
Want to make some bitcoins ? Miner on ebay | Buy GH/s
aib
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48

Advance Internet Block Representitive


View Profile WWW
June 27, 2016, 06:21:19 PM
 #14633

for a question regards P2Pool for litecoin (sCrypt)

the highest difficulty is 15258.556231856346 when I do  address/999999999+999999999

anyone know if that's enough to scale up to a higher hash rate?


and also I found that hash power always get cut off by P2Pool 10-20% compare to F2Pool.
anyone know how to tweak it to make it make stable and high hashrate?



Advance Internet Block (AIB)
squidicuz
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 50


View Profile
June 27, 2016, 11:51:11 PM
 #14634

I have switched my nodes over to p2pool v16. The current hashrate is approximately 97% v16 over the last hour, and about 76% v16 over the last day. This means that anyone still on v15 will soon have their shares ignored by the rest of the network.

Awesome!

Seems there are a few new miners as well?  Welcome!  Smiley
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078



View Profile
June 28, 2016, 12:53:49 PM
 #14635

v16 : job done.




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
KyrosKrane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2016, 06:27:52 PM
 #14636

Is something odd going on with P2pool? Check the hashrate and number of miners for the last few hours on this chart:

http://minefast.coincadence.com/p2pool-stats.php

This mirrors what I'm seeing with my own P2pool nodes - one hosted locally with my miner, and one on a VPS. It looks like the miner isn't getting proper responses (?) back from the pool, so it keeps mining without any new work. But it seems it's getting *something* that makes it think the pool is alive, so it's not failing over to the backup pools. In turn, it seems the P2pool node is registering zero hash rate. If I restart the pool and miner, it goes back to normal for a while, then zeros out again.

A quick check of the servers shows that P2pool is hogging 100% CPU time (on one core, of course), and the messages in the text log show it receiving hundreds of new shares.

Currently mining on V16.

Any thoughts?

Edit: An image of the chart at the link above, in case it later turns out to be an unrelated error.


Tips and donations: 1KyrosREGDkNLp1rMd9wfVwfkXYHTd6j5U  |  BTC P2Pool node: p2pool.kyros.info:9332
sawa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 553



View Profile
June 28, 2016, 09:21:45 PM
 #14637

At the time when the giant amount of transactions go through BTC network, many nodes lose their connection with the daemon.
When the connection is restored, they actively start to synchronize shares with other nodes.
I noticed that in the process of an exchange of shares with remote peers the node stops taking the job from miners.
Code:
2016-06-29 01:38:16.266381 Processing 109 shares from 46.32.254.29:9333...
2016-06-29 01:39:56.764554 ... done processing 109 shares. New: 19 Have: 22792/~17280
40 seconds of inactivity. It causes a significant drop of hashrate and the graphs of local rate become spiked.

I have reported this issue (please leave your comments there): https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/311
It seems that such problems on all nodes.

jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2016, 09:43:20 PM
 #14638

Is something odd going on with P2pool? Check the hashrate and number of miners for the last few hours on this chart:
I'm seeing this too. Furthermore, I'm seeing stuff like this:

2016-06-28 14:40:39.001988 > in download_shares:
2016-06-28 14:40:39.002117 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2016-06-28 14:40:39.002181 > Failure: p2pool.p2p.ShareReplyError: too long
2016-06-28 14:40:39.002370 Requesting parent share ea0f2aee from 10.0.1.3:38393
2016-06-28 14:40:39.311156 > in download_shares:
2016-06-28 14:40:39.311285 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2016-06-28 14:40:39.311351 > Failure: p2pool.p2p.ShareReplyError: too long
2016-06-28 14:40:39.311523 Requesting parent share ea0f2aee from 10.0.1.3:37971
2016-06-28 14:40:39.494657 > in download_shares:
2016-06-28 14:40:39.494775 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2016-06-28 14:40:39.494827 > Failure: p2pool.p2p.ShareReplyError: too long

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2016, 10:02:48 PM
 #14639

My guess is that what's happening is that someone mined a share that is very close to the 1 MB limit, like 999980 bytes or something like that, and there's enough p2pool metadata overhead to push the share message over 1000000 bytes, which is the per-message limit defined in p2pool/bitcoin/p2p:17. This is triggering a TooLong exception which prevents that share (and any subsequent shares) from being processed and added to the share chain. Later, the node notices that it's missing the share (which it hasn't blacklisted or marked as invalid), and tries to download it again. Rinse, repeat.

A quick hack to get past this might be to increase the 1000000 in p2pool/bitcoin/p2p:17 to something bigger. As far as I can tell if we did that, this would mean that people who mine excessively large blocks (e.g. with Bitcoin Unlimited) that would get rejected by the network might have their shares accepted by p2pool, which would end up being a sort of block withholding attack. I don't think this would be too big of a concern, so I'm going to try to raise the limit on one of my nodes and see if it resolves the issue.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2016, 10:10:24 PM
 #14640

Note: accepting messages over 1000000 bytes comprises a network hard fork. Don't do this at home without approval from forrestv. I'm just doing this for testing, and afterwards I will purge my share history on that node.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $75 to $90/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
Pages: « 1 ... 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!