Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 04:24:09 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 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032831 times)
Panda Mouse
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 88


Gliding...


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 04:16:03 PM
 #1621

I made change, pls see my previous post.

Yeah code looks good.  Thanks for supporting p2pool I am sure smaller miners appreciate the reduced min difficulty (and variance) that will cause.
Would this be suggested for 1Gh/s or is that considered a small miner?

I made hundreds of tests, this is optimalized for p2pool.
IMO with 1GH/s dont use name/1500+1. Simply username is enaugh.

Panda Mouse.
1481214249
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214249

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214249
Reply with quote  #2

1481214249
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481214249
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214249

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214249
Reply with quote  #2

1481214249
Report to moderator
1481214249
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214249

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214249
Reply with quote  #2

1481214249
Report to moderator
1481214249
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214249

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214249
Reply with quote  #2

1481214249
Report to moderator
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 04:22:47 PM
 #1622

The average miner on p2pool (and thus the average share variance) is ~1.5GH/s

You "could" do it as a 1 GH/s miner but you already have above average variance so I wouldn't. Smiley

So a miner w/ 3GH/s @ 1,500 would have the same variance as the avg miner does @ target 750 (current min share diff).
A miner w/ 15 GH/s @ 7,500 would have the same variance as a 1.5GH/s miner @ target 750 (current min share diff).

While I don't suggest someone raise it that high the more hash power you have the more you can raise diff and still have better than avg variance.
sharky112065
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 383



View Profile
March 26, 2012, 04:34:30 PM
 #1623

The average miner on p2pool (and thus the average share variance) is ~1.5GH/s

You "could" do it as a 1 GH/s miner but you already have above average variance so I wouldn't. Smiley

So a miner w/ 3GH/s @ 1,500 would have the same variance as the avg miner does @ target 750 (current min share diff).
A miner w/ 15 GH/s @ 7,500 would have the same variance as a 1.5GH/s miner @ target 750 (current min share diff).

While I don't suggest someone raise it that high the more hash power you have the more you can raise diff and still have better than avg variance.

It would be nice if p2pool showed another chart/graph that suggests what to set it to. IMO more miners would be apt to make the change if it were easier to determine what it should be set at.

Forrestv, any chance of that happening in the future?

Donations welcome: 12KaKtrK52iQjPdtsJq7fJ7smC32tXWbWr
Panda Mouse
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 88


Gliding...


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 05:11:05 PM
 #1624

The average miner on p2pool (and thus the average share variance) is ~1.5GH/s

You "could" do it as a 1 GH/s miner but you already have above average variance so I wouldn't. Smiley

So a miner w/ 3GH/s @ 1,500 would have the same variance as the avg miner does @ target 750 (current min share diff).
A miner w/ 15 GH/s @ 7,500 would have the same variance as a 1.5GH/s miner @ target 750 (current min share diff).

While I don't suggest someone raise it that high the more hash power you have the more you can raise diff and still have better than avg variance.

And I have now funny signature on the graphics:

"username/3000+1"

 Smiley

Panda Mouse.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 06:33:10 PM
 #1625

Yeah someone has asked forrest to remove the /xxx+y from charts and reports.

thus "username/3000+1" = "username".  Maybe in a future version.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 07:16:14 PM
 #1626

Custom Fee Rules for p2pool (and solo) miners:

As a p2pool miner would you like to be able to control which tx you include in a block?

I created a bounty to modify bitcoind to allow a miner to set rules on which tx are included in the block they are working on.  Luke Jr has created and published the source code.  Code is open source licensed under MIT license (same license as bitcoin).

As the block subsidy declines over time fees will play an important role in miner revenue.  If users can get included in the next block w/ no fee they will never have an incentive to include a fee.  The RPC calls allow a user to set the minimum fee they will accept and tx w/ smaller fee are excluded from the tx list that p2pool uses to build a block.  p2pool miners also are unlikely to alter the fee dynamic but we can be part of the discussion.  As pools (including p2pool miners) set fee requirements >0 confirmation times for free/low fee tx will increase.  This will create an incentive for users to increase fees.  We aren't talking massive fees but every bitcent helps.

Luke has requested a pull into the "mainline" bitcoind here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/989

Please don't comment at the link above unless you are an active client developer.  Cluttering up this with "yeah add it" is bad form.  I included the link to allow people to allows you to see the status on the pull.

Here the "custom fee" git created by Luke
https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/tree/customfee

I will try to get some compilation instructions up for windows/linux for users who wish to try it out before it becomes part of the mainline.

Non-developers can indicate support with a post in this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=73941.0

More support = quicker inclusion in mainline client.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 08:20:00 PM
 #1627

Custom Fee Rules for p2pool (and solo) miners:

As a p2pool miner would you like to be able to control which tx you include in a block?

I created a bounty to modify bitcoind to allow a miner to set rules on which tx are included in the block they are working on.  Luke Jr has created and published the source code.  Code is open source licensed under MIT license (same license as bitcoin).

As the block subsidy declines over time fees will play an important role in miner revenue.  If users can get included in the next block w/ no fee they will never have an incentive to include a fee.  The RPC calls allow a user to set the minimum fee they will accept and tx w/ smaller fee are excluded from the tx list that p2pool uses to build a block.  p2pool miners also are unlikely to alter the fee dynamic but we can be part of the discussion.  As pools (including p2pool miners) set fee requirements >0 confirmation times for free/low fee tx will increase.  This will create an incentive for users to increase fees.  We aren't talking massive fees but every bitcent helps.

Luke has requested a pull into the "mainline" bitcoind here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/989

Please don't comment at the link above unless you are an active client developer.  Cluttering up this with "yeah add it" is bad form.  I included the link to allow people to allows you to see the status on the pull.

Here the "custom fee" git created by Luke
https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/tree/customfee

I will try to get some compilation instructions up for windows/linux for users who wish to try it out before it becomes part of the mainline.

Non-developers can indicate support with a post in this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=73941.0

More support = quicker inclusion in mainline client.


It is interesting to note that there are 2 pools that avoid paying fees by putting the payment in the coinbase.

P2Pool and Eligius (Luke-jr's pool)

2nd interesting point is that Eligius ignores every txn without fees.

It is interesting that you'd make the comment about fees being the necessary evil on a pool that avoids paying them (by increasing the block size quite a lot) 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
bitclown
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 186


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 09:43:57 PM
 #1628

So it has come to this. P2Pool miners joining the Mystery Miner in the transaction throttling attack. Bitcoin is still an experiment being bootstrapped. Gatekeepers asking for fees is not what we need to get the ball rolling. It's interesting that 'ol evil Deepbit now has the most liberal fee policy for standard transactions.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 09:46:56 PM
 #1629

So it has come to this. P2Pool miners joining the Mystery Miner in the transaction throttling attack.

Funny.  Charging for a service = attack.  In related news mining pools and Mt.Gox daily launch massive attacks on the Bitcoin economy.

Also please don't slander p2pool.  p2pool is made up of individual members.  Saying p2pool is attacking Bitcoin makes no more sense than saying Bitcoin is attacking Bitcoin.  Be a man and say DeathAndTaxes is attacking the network when you lie.


I would say something like "cry bitclown cry, your freeloader tears only nourish me", but that would be trolling so I won't.
ChanceCoats123
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680



View Profile
March 26, 2012, 10:46:30 PM
 #1630

Am I the only one who doesn't understand why people join other's nodes instead of creating their own? If you can point your miner successfully at someone else's node, then you have the skills necessary to run your own. No drama should come from this. P2pool is fee free...if you use your own node. If you want to pay 0 fees then run your own got dang node...!
Krak
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 591



View Profile WWW
March 26, 2012, 10:58:14 PM
 #1631

Am I the only one who doesn't understand why people join other's nodes instead of creating their own? If you can point your miner successfully at someone else's node, then you have the skills necessary to run your own. No drama should come from this. P2pool is fee free...if you use your own node. If you want to pay 0 fees then run your own got dang node...!
If somebody has a slower internet connection, they might not want 10+ connections to other nodes (not to mention all the connections that bitcoind makes) slowing them down. And of course there's the 1GB+ blockchain download.

BTC: 1KrakenLFEFg33A4f6xpwgv3UUoxrLPuGn
bitclown
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 186


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 11:27:15 PM
 #1632

Did you think I shouldn't have control over the hardware I've purchased, the electricity I pay for, or the software I run?
Of course you should, I was merely voicing my opinion. Sorry for trolling. In my defense, I am a clown.

What this does is start the path towards the competition to secure the network and process transactions in exchange for a fee. This is required for Bitcoin to be sustainable in the long run. Obviously the most profitable miners will be the most successful in their endeavors wresting control away from those who are not. This is the free market at work, and it's going to continue to be a fantastic ride.
It'll indeed be a fantastic ride, and more thought-out fee policies are needed. My objection was to DaT's intention, as stated in the MM thread, to rise his fee threshold to 0.01 BTC right now. The current transaction traffic is minuscule. What we need is growth, and I don't see how fees higher than regular bank transfers will encourage new users to play with an experimental network. Fees will accumulate as the traffic increases. As a casual miner who are unlikely to mine many blocks on my own I'd rather take my hashing power to a pool whose operator share these views.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 26, 2012, 11:53:46 PM
 #1633

It is interesting that you'd make the comment about fees being the necessary evil on a pool that avoids paying them (by increasing the block size quite a lot) Smiley

Could you provide some proof that traditional pool payouts have less of an impact on block size when compared to P2Pool payouts? I do believe this is what you are insinuating with the quoted comment.

Just quickly browsing some blocks and this is what I find.

A deepbit block with what I am assuming are deepbit pool payouts. (1VayNert is deepbit). http://blockexplorer.com/b/173005

21.192 kB (may be slightly off, I did this manually and could have missed a payment or two) of transactions with the 1VayNert address.

A P2Pool block with the obvious payout. http://blockexplorer.com/b/173003

7.603 kB of P2Pool payout (at least this information is easy to audit).

Is this conclusive? Obviously not.

The reason I'm posting this is because I think you should provide some evidence before making veiled accusations that P2Pool or Eligius are adding to the size of the block chain at a rate that is greater than any other pool.
Can you show that it isn't by design or can you only pick a simple example and not even understand what that example represents?
(Also interesting that you ignored the point of the post and zeroed in on the extra bracketed text Smiley - I presume that means you have no comment on the point of the post?)

Anyway ...
P2Pool pays each person who provides at least one share every 3 blocks, the amount they are due every block no matter how small it is.

Assuming a normal pool pays each person with a single transaction every block they mine, then yep a normal pool is using approximately 7.5 times the amount of blockchain space ... according to those 2 blocks (of course a normal pool doesn't pay everyone every time a block gets mined ... but anyway)
I take that was the point of why you mentioned those 2 specific blocks but didn't bother to show any understanding of what they represent?

Of course, you can't change that payment process with P2Pool - it's fixed by design.

With any pool that deals with balances and payments, that can be reduced by simply aggregating payments (as normal pools already do)
But of course they would need to have less than 1 payment per 7.5 blocks the pool mines per person (which I have no idea of the statistics - and by the looks of that block, DeepBit might not?) if they paid each person with a separate txn.

Anyway ... if DeepBit people are being paid on average more than once every 7.5 DeepBit blocks then DeepBit is using more blockchain space than P2Pool
Is this true? Feel free to apply some brain power ... Smiley

However, the point being that it is possible on a standard pool to aggregate payouts and to pay multiple people per txn, but if normal pools are not aggregating payments and also not paying multiple people per txn then they too are wasting block space ... which can be changed, unlike P2Pool that cannot.

The opposite way to consider it is imagine that every miner was using P2Pool (yeah OK P2Pool can't handle that - but what the hell just imagine it anyway - what certain P2Pool zealots have wet dreams about) then every person who generates a share on average once every 3 blocks or more will get on average a payment in every P2Pool block

To put that in perspective: to receive on average one share per 3 blocks (at the moment roughly 14hrs) with a P2Pool share difficulty of roughly 670, you would require approx 60Mh/s ... to thus get a payment every P2Pool block.

Based on P2Pool being roughly 330GH/s - that's roughly 4.5 blocks a day:
Interesting, if P2Pool is making 4.5 blocks a day and a normal pool is paying every person on average once every 5/3 days, they are using roughly the same amount of block-chain space.

Thus me saying a 'lot' is certainly an exaggeration.
If pools pay single transactions per person and on average each person more often than once every 5/3 days then normal pools are using more blockchain space than P2Pool.

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
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737



View Profile
March 27, 2012, 01:33:18 AM
 #1634

The nice thing about p2pool is that DeathAndTaxes and I can disagree on this and we can each do what we want to with out own bitcoind instances.  I personally, don't see any need to restrict transactions at this point in bitcoin's evolution.

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
NothinG
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560



View Profile
March 27, 2012, 02:26:41 AM
 #1635

The nice thing about p2pool is that DeathAndTaxes and I can disagree on this and we can each do what we want to with out own bitcoind instances.  I personally, don't see any   need to restrict transactions at this point in bitcoin's evolution.
I think it should be weighed at least.
Like if transaction was sent with a 0.01 BTC Tx Fee, push it through TX as fast as you can. Like, preferred.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 27, 2012, 02:31:06 AM
 #1636

Followup of my above post with some DeepBit numbers:
so I asked DeepBit and he said that the auto payout feature is 1 payout per day (but 3 manual payouts are possible but most people use auto)

If we calculate based on the 1 payout per day, then since DeepBit is around 3500GH/s that's about 48 blocks a day so most people are getting at most 1 payment per 48 blocks so using 1/48 of the previous calculated ratio: P2Pool is using 6 (rounded down from 6.4 to compensate for some manual payouts) times as much blockchain space as DeepBit is using per miner.

Even if you make the wildly ridiculous claim that everyone on DeepBit is using manual payments 3 times a day - P2Pool is still using twice as much blockchain space as DeepBit is using per miner.

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
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737



View Profile
March 27, 2012, 03:22:18 AM
 #1637

The nice thing about p2pool is that DeathAndTaxes and I can disagree on this and we can each do what we want to with out own bitcoind instances.  I personally, don't see any need to restrict transactions at this point in bitcoin's evolution.
I think it should be weighed at least.
Like if transaction was sent with a 0.01 BTC Tx Fee, push it through TX as fast as you can. Like, preferred.

It is already prioritized in the default bitcoin transaction selection algorithm.  When there are too many transactions to fit in a block, bitcoin will choose transactions with the highest priority and tx fee is one way a transaction can get a higher priority.

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
March 27, 2012, 04:24:48 AM
 #1638

Followup of my above post with some DeepBit numbers:
so I asked DeepBit and he said that the auto payout feature is 1 payout per day (but 3 manual payouts are possible but most people use auto)

If we calculate based on the 1 payout per day, then since DeepBit is around 3500GH/s that's about 48 blocks a day so most people are getting at most 1 payment per 48 blocks so using 1/48 of the previous calculated ratio: P2Pool is using 6 (rounded down from 6.4 to compensate for some manual payouts) times as much blockchain space as DeepBit is using per miner.

Even if you make the wildly ridiculous claim that everyone on DeepBit is using manual payments 3 times a day - P2Pool is still using twice as much blockchain space as DeepBit is using per miner.
How much of a problem is having a large number of small coinbase transactions?

If blockchain bloat becomes a problem maybe pools like p2pmining.com will gain more popularity.

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 27, 2012, 04:26:58 AM
 #1639

Not a problem at all.  The # of coinbases is fixed.  As tx volume grows the coinbase as % of block size will continue to fall. 
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 27, 2012, 04:40:21 AM
 #1640

Not a problem at all.  The # of coinbases is fixed.  As tx volume grows the coinbase as % of block size will continue to fall. 
Um - so that's assuming the number of people mining P2Pool will never increase from the number it is today.

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 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 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!