Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 02:18:03 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2031586 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 19, 2012, 06:53:42 PM
 #2001

hmm given the major difference is the the # of orphans it makes me think your connectivity is the largest factor.

If the p2pool and/or bitcoind instances were slow (due to insufficient memory, I/O, or CPU time) then at least in theory one would expect to see higher deads not orphans.

Obviously more testing is needed but my guess is the datacenter has a lower latency link to the avg peer.  Thus you are learning about new shares quicker and getting your shares into the chain quicker. I may need to play around and see about recording latency to peers.  See if there is any correlation between orphan and peer latency and/or # of peers.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481033883
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481033883

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481033883
Reply with quote  #2

1481033883
Report to moderator
1481033883
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481033883

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481033883
Reply with quote  #2

1481033883
Report to moderator
camolist
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile WWW
April 19, 2012, 07:01:29 PM
 #2002

hmm given the major difference is the the # of orphans it makes me think your connectivity is the largest factor.

that's what i was thinking

but adding in 50-60ms to connect to the datacenter which then connects out to the peers i would expect close to the same results unless my connectivity to the datacenter is so much better then to the peers


waiting for setup on the vps to finish to start testing if increasing the cpu/ram (it was way low before) lowers the dead rates a bit. but i think the dead rate on the server end has more to do with the 50-60ms trip back and forth getting new work to the miners

Krak
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 591



View Profile WWW
April 19, 2012, 07:12:39 PM
 #2003

What specs are on your VPS? I'm thinking about renting one that's local to me, but I dunno how much I should be looking at spending.

BTC: 1KrakenLFEFg33A4f6xpwgv3UUoxrLPuGn
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
April 19, 2012, 07:20:02 PM
 #2004

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.)

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
camolist
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile WWW
April 19, 2012, 07:29:57 PM
 #2005

What specs are on your VPS? I'm thinking about renting one that's local to me, but I dunno how much I should be looking at spending.

it was just 300mb of ram but that was looking to be a bit low so upping it to 512 on the reinstall

cpu was 1% guaranteed on one core am upping that to 1% guaranteed on 8 cores since the price difference is only $5.6 a month


cpu is hard to compare to other hosts because using FAR more then 1% will always be possible (i've tried litecoin mining on these and found 1% of the cpu could use 90+% the vast majority of the time) (and an interesting note was it was still not profitable only paying for 1% of the cpu and using 90% with litecoins)

hashalfahalve
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 100

Support the bitcoin economy, use BTC merchants


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 01:30:14 AM
 #2006

Is someone perhaps able to help me understand why the hash rate reported on the p2pool console output says 3722MH when my miners are saying 4099MH?

I have a 2.36% reject rate, so even with that in account, shouldn't I still be seeing 4002MH?

I can't seem to figure out where the 280-300MH loss is!

When I increase aggression on cgminer and get a higher reject rate, the p2pool output shows a higher hashrate! So confusing...
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
April 20, 2012, 01:32:48 AM
 #2007

p2pool mhash is a big guesstimate

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  OpenVPN 2GB Free  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 02:13:06 AM
 #2008

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 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
Doff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 327


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 03:39:53 AM
 #2009

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



View Profile
April 20, 2012, 03:55:45 PM
 #2010

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
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
April 20, 2012, 08:22:07 PM
 #2011

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


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

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 205


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:33:50 PM
 #2013

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.

1Cabinz1RSccAbFx2DikYomSKeMupy7M6V
Gabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:40:06 PM
 #2014

Nice, your friend is now paying useless fees. His fault, i don't care  Wink
iopq
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 12:56:26 PM
 #2015

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: 1204


Just along for the ride...


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 01:00:37 PM
 #2016

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

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
 #2017

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



View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:03:16 PM
 #2018

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


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:10:04 PM
 #2019

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 205


View Profile
April 21, 2012, 06:21:10 PM
 #2020

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)

1Cabinz1RSccAbFx2DikYomSKeMupy7M6V
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 ... 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!