Bitcoin Forum
March 19, 2024, 08:30:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2591571 times)
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060



View Profile WWW
April 20, 2012, 01:32:48 AM
 #2001

p2pool mhash is a big guesstimate

1710837023
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710837023

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710837023
Reply with quote  #2

1710837023
Report to moderator
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1710837023
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710837023

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710837023
Reply with quote  #2

1710837023
Report to moderator
1710837023
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710837023

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710837023
Reply with quote  #2

1710837023
Report to moderator
1710837023
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710837023

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710837023
Reply with quote  #2

1710837023
Report to moderator
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4438
Merit: 1794


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 02:13:06 AM
 #2002

The address getting the largest (now failed) payments is: 1FcTuPJzdekvzTyQ5dXsnsVyT4F5G1tCjc
If it is P2Pool though, it's slightly modified
(it doesn't have the 0 BTC payment tacked on the end of all P2Pool coinbase txn's - but I wonder if it is documented anywhere what that actually is?)

They can't be P2Pool blocks - the 0 output at the end is essential to P2Pool's operation. It links P2Pool's internal data for a particular share to the block that share would have mined. (The other alternative is sticking it in the coinbase, but the coinbase of the block that I looked at is nearly empty.)
That's why I was saying that if it was a P2Pool it has been modified.

The 2 reasons for thinking it is something like P2Pool are that every block (that I looked at) comes from a different IP address and it uses the coinbase payments.

The fact that they are generating bad blocks (including a bad txn) means of course that they are running non-upgraded bitcoind's
Anyway, I guess if no one reading here knows about it, it can't be helped.

Pity it's wasting even a small amount of hashing power (a bit more that a block a week)

Pool: https://kano.is - low 0.5% fee PPLNS 3 Days - Most reliable Solo with ONLY 0.5% fee   Bitcointalk thread: Forum
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code - k for kano
The ONLY active original developer of cgminer. Original master git: https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer
Doff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 327
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 03:39:53 AM
 #2003

Local rate: 866MH/s (2.5% DOA)

Shares: 17 total (2 orphaned, 1 dead) Efficiency: 89.90%

Are these normal stats for P2pool?  2 Orphaned 1 dead, seems bad but I'm not sure. I love using this pool but I always feel like I'm just losing BTC when I use it for some reason.

Maybe someone can educate me as to what a normal payout I could expect in a 24hr  period with that hash rate, orphaned, and dead.

Smiley
ragnard
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 66
Merit: 10



View Profile
April 20, 2012, 03:55:45 PM
 #2004

I have very high efficiency with my current p2pool setup.  Here are my current stats (it has been a week or two since I most recently restarted p2pool):

Code:
Shares: 896 (22 orphan, 10 dead) Stale rate: ~3.6% (2-5%) Efficiency: ~102.6% (101-104%)

I have been consistently getting approx 3.5% stale rate for the past month or so, so this is not a fluke.  Here are some musings...

Just to add for comparison.  I'm running my p2pool node on a VMWare virtual machine on a pretty new Dell Poweredge in a datacenter with a 100Mbps fiber uplink to large Internet backbone providers.

My p2pool node was restarted a couple weeks ago and since then I have these stats:

Code:
Stale rate: ~4.3% (1-9%) Efficiency: ~105.1% (100-108%)
and
Code:
load average: 0.10, 0.06, 0.05

My 2 miners with around 700MH/s connect to the p2pool server over the Internet and have ~20ms RTT ping to it.  So, running on a virtual machine does pretty good.  Assuming a somewhat modern server, I think the quality of your connectivity is more important.  I should also note that another virtual machine on the same server is running the CPU at 100% doing litecoin mining, so the server is being worked plenty hard.
forrestv (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516
Merit: 643


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 08:22:07 PM
 #2005

That's why I was saying that if it was a P2Pool it has been modified.

The 2 reasons for thinking it is something like P2Pool are that every block (that I looked at) comes from a different IP address and it uses the coinbase payments.

The fact that they are generating bad blocks (including a bad txn) means of course that they are running non-upgraded bitcoind's
Anyway, I guess if no one reading here knows about it, it can't be helped.

Pity it's wasting even a small amount of hashing power (a bit more that a block a week)

I believe that they're BitPenny blocks - they were discussed in IRC yesterday.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 05:35:33 AM
 #2006

Luck really has been awful on p2pool lately - a friend of mine's getting into mining with his dual 7970 gaming PC, got him to point them at p2pool.
Result = 15 hours of 1.3Ghash/s with nothing to show for it thanks to the orphaned block today  Roll Eyes

Needless to say, he's switched to standard PPS pools  Tongue

Our overall luck since p2pool started though is horrific! Mathematically I make it something like a 2% chance of a pool doing this badly over that time period.
cabin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 604
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:33:50 PM
 #2007

Luck really has been awful on p2pool lately - a friend of mine's getting into mining with his dual 7970 gaming PC, got him to point them at p2pool.
Result = 15 hours of 1.3Ghash/s with nothing to show for it thanks to the orphaned block today  Roll Eyes

Needless to say, he's switched to standard PPS pools  Tongue

Our overall luck since p2pool started though is horrific! Mathematically I make it something like a 2% chance of a pool doing this badly over that time period.

If it is something other than variance, it is probably the orphans. Compared to a big pool your average P2Pool user has:
- a slower, higher latency internet connection
- a stock, unoptimized bitcoind
- may not have any incoming bitcoind connections at all because port 8333 is blocked

These things put them at a disadvantage and may result in slightly more orphans, which just looks like slightly worse luck since I don't think we can track down all the orphans at the moment.
Gabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1008


If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:40:06 PM
 #2008

Nice, your friend is now paying useless fees. His fault, i don't care  Wink

iopq
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:56:26 PM
 #2009

Luck really has been awful on p2pool lately - a friend of mine's getting into mining with his dual 7970 gaming PC, got him to point them at p2pool.
Result = 15 hours of 1.3Ghash/s with nothing to show for it thanks to the orphaned block today  Roll Eyes

Needless to say, he's switched to standard PPS pools  Tongue

Our overall luck since p2pool started though is horrific! Mathematically I make it something like a 2% chance of a pool doing this badly over that time period.
both of the pools I mined on have went down
the back-up first and then the main, lol

p2pool will never go down or have lag or have its wallet stolen
arklan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008



View Profile
April 21, 2012, 01:00:37 PM
 #2010

is there any theory as to WHY p2pool's having os much trouble lately? is it pure probability playing out?

i don't post much, but this space for rent.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1063


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
 #2011

Quote
If it is something other than variance, it is probably the orphans. Compared to a big pool your average P2Pool user has:
- a slower, higher latency internet connection
- a stock, unoptimized bitcoind
- may not have any incoming bitcoind connections at all because port 8333 is blocked

Share orphans don't have any effect on block generation rate.  Period.  Shares are completely worthless and just a method to track division of work and profits.

Poor connection to the bitcoin network could result in higher BLOCK orphans but p2pool has <1% block orphan rate which is similar to other pools.
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 500



View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:03:16 PM
 #2012

Poor connection to the bitcoin network could result in higher BLOCK orphans but p2pool has <1% block orphan rate which is similar to other pools.

We have 331 total blocks and 6 of them orphaned.  That's a rate of 1.8%.

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1063


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:10:04 PM
 #2013

Poor connection to the bitcoin network could result in higher BLOCK orphans but p2pool has <1% block orphan rate which is similar to other pools.

We have 331 total blocks and 6 of them orphaned.  That's a rate of 1.8%.

OK stand corrected.  The larger point is that share orphans don't affect the pools payout.  Only orphaned blocks do.  Most well running pools lose about 1% to 2% of revenue due to orphaned blocks.

So if we consider <1% to be optimal.  Then at worse p2pool is 1% worse than optimal.
cabin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 604
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:21:10 PM
 #2014

Poor connection to the bitcoin network could result in higher BLOCK orphans but p2pool has <1% block orphan rate which is similar to other pools.

We have 331 total blocks and 6 of them orphaned.  That's a rate of 1.8%.

The note about orphans on http://p2pool.info/ suggests that the real number is higher than that too. A pool can count every one of their orphans but we can't. Would be nice to know for sure one way or another if the block orphans are a big factor or not. (The share orphans are a non-issue)
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 21, 2012, 07:10:06 PM
 #2015

Let's talk numbers and theory. My theory is that orphans (p2pool's stale shares or Bitcoin's orphan blocks) are caused by latencies between the miner, p2pool node, p2pool network for p2pool stale shares and miner, p2pool node, bitcoind and the Bitcoin P2P network for orphan blocks.

Furthermore, as I understand things, the amount of stale shares should be proportional to the miner/p2pool node/p2pool network latencies. For example, if on average a share comes every 10 seconds and on average the latency is around 100ms for all miners, we should have 1% of stale shares (there's a ~1 in 100 chances that another valid share can be found by a node until it knows the share and inform miners to work on it). We have around 8% stale shares right now, so I estimate the latencies between miners on the p2pool network to be around 800ms (seems high at first but isn't too bad when you consider that the p2pool network should cover the whole planet and there are at least 3 components involved in latencies : miner, p2pool node and bitcoind process).

If bitcoind and the Bitcoin network were roughly as efficient as p2pool, the amount of orphans should be around 800ms/10min (in fact around 1/60 the proportion of p2pool's stale share given the target interval difference). Currently it should be 0.133% instead of 1.8%. Although 1.8% can't impact us much (our luck is around 90%, so if there's a problem, it isn't caused by orphan blocks), it's rather high when compared to what p2pool can achieve with a 10 seconds target interval instead of a 10 minutes. Either bitcoind isn't optimized or the size of the Bitcoin network compared to p2pool adds noticeable latencies.

P2pool tuning guide
Trade BTC for €/$ at bitcoin.de (referral), it's cheaper and faster (acts as escrow and lets the buyers do bank transfers).
Tip: 17bdPfKXXvr7zETKRkPG14dEjfgBt5k2dd
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 500



View Profile
April 21, 2012, 08:10:09 PM
 #2016

Poor connection to the bitcoin network could result in higher BLOCK orphans but p2pool has <1% block orphan rate which is similar to other pools.

We have 331 total blocks and 6 of them orphaned.  That's a rate of 1.8%.

The note about orphans on http://p2pool.info/ suggests that the real number is higher than that too. A pool can count every one of their orphans but we can't. Would be nice to know for sure one way or another if the block orphans are a big factor or not. (The share orphans are a non-issue)

Note, the orphans that are known (the 6 on p2pool.info) are already accounted for in the luck calculations (i.e. luck is not reduced by known orphans).  The only think that could, in theory, be making the luck look lower than it should is unknown orphans, and I don't think there are many of them.  While the statement I made on p2pool.info is technically accurate, I do scan blockchain.info regularly looking for orphaned blocks and it does a pretty solid job of knowing about all orphaned blocks because it connects to 3000+ bitcoin nodes.

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2347


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 09:43:41 PM
 #2017


Might be worth running the calculation to see how much hashpower it would cost a large competitor (pool) to run a p2pool node and refrain from sending in blocks. It would need to do this only at a level that makes p2pools persistent "bad luck" slightly worse than paying fees at pools to be effective.

Back of envelope says 5-10% has gone missing somewhere, assuming it is not all bad luck, so say around 30 GHash/s? Would it be worth it to "them"?

Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 22, 2012, 06:16:05 AM
 #2018


Might be worth running the calculation to see how much hashpower it would cost a large competitor (pool) to run a p2pool node and refrain from sending in blocks. It would need to do this only at a level that makes p2pools persistent "bad luck" slightly worse than paying fees at pools to be effective.

Back of envelope says 5-10% has gone missing somewhere, assuming it is not all bad luck, so say around 30 GHash/s? Would it be worth it to "them"?

"Worth"? That assumes some gain by doing that. To drive away p2pool-users? It would be easier by a magnitude to use those 30Gh/s to "normally" mine for profit, and attack a regular centralized pool with DDOS. That would drive off their users to some degree, maybe attracting some of them for his own pool.

All data is there already anyway. We see which nodes exist, which nodes contribute how many shares (to add to the p2pool net hashpower) and which nodes do or do not find bitcoin blocks (to reduce the luck). If someone wants, he should be able to dig through the stats to verify/falsify this. Even if those 30Gh/s were on dozens of individual nodes, they probably come from the same IP. Even if not, with 30Gh/s you should be able to find anything, any clue.

You see, even with this "bad luck", people are sticking to p2pool, as can be seen in the stats. Not because p2pool is necessarily paying out better than all other pools at any time, but because p2pool is superior and healthier for the whole bitcoin universe.

But yes. I believe p2pool has a problem which may have stayed unidentified yet. The "hashing power reflected by hashes" and "hashing power reflected by blocks" are two fairly straight lines, but clearly diverging. Its not two overlapping lines, its not one line being crossed by the other all the time.
Connectivity seems to be one problem for the individual miner. Not for the global p2pool efficiency though.

Ente
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2347


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
April 22, 2012, 07:48:11 AM
 #2019


No need to get all uppity, I'm just trying to eliminate some possibilities to get to the bottom of the pool's poor performance ... it may be bad luck but it is looking like more than that the longer it continues.

ChanceCoats123
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 682
Merit: 500



View Profile
April 22, 2012, 08:07:25 AM
 #2020

Not to mention people are staying with p2pool because they are lazy... (this guy). All jokes aside, it's easy to stay with the familiar. Smiley
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 ... 814 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!