Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 08:23:59 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032694 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 24, 2012, 08:29:09 PM
 #2061

It seems to be bouncing around today.  Saw a high of 380 earlier then it fell down to 330 ish then popped back up to 400.  I guess some new users are trying it out.
1481185439
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185439

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185439
Reply with quote  #2

1481185439
Report to moderator
1481185439
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185439

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185439
Reply with quote  #2

1481185439
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
April 24, 2012, 09:07:09 PM
 #2062

I threw my little farm at it for an hour or so to test something, may be back soon.
Proofer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 251


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 03:45:48 AM
 #2063

..let me know a few hours before your rig goes down, next time, ok? I would like a "warning, blockfinding-spree ahead!" warning system! ;-)

It all evens out after some time.

Ente
Actually ... no it doesn't.
If you lose out in a good luck spree there is no guarantee whatsoever that you will get it back later.
There is no memory in bitcoin hashing.

Kano: Central limits theorem.


IMHO Kano is correct, and I don't see the relevance of the Central Limit Theorem to the question of whether bad luck in the past will be compensated for in the future.  The idea that tossing a fair coin and getting, say, six heads in a row will be "evened out" by disproportionally more tails in future tosses is known as the Gambler's Fallacy.  If you've had bad [or good] luck in the past, then your lifetime expectation for luck is bad [or good]; you cannot change the past -- it is the baseline for your future.  More generally, probability theory deals with unknown (often future) events, not known past events.
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 07:29:56 AM
 #2064

IMHO Kano is correct, and I don't see the relevance of the Central Limit Theorem to the question of whether bad luck in the past will be compensated for in the future.  The idea that tossing a fair coin and getting, say, six heads in a row will be "evened out" by disproportionally more tails in future tosses is known as the Gambler's Fallacy.  If you've had bad [or good] luck in the past, then your lifetime expectation for luck is bad [or good]; you cannot change the past -- it is the baseline for your future.  More generally, probability theory deals with unknown (often future) events, not known past events.

No, of course not "compensated" as a reaction to the bad luck streak. But "evened out" in the sense that this single bad luck streak has less and less influence as the time or number of draws rise.

I am pretty sure we all are more or less talking about the same thing, and actually agreeing. How about we say "there are bad times, there are good times, everything is fine", and leave that page-long non-p2pool-related statistics/probability stuff?

The still unanswered question remains:
Is p2pool in fact statistically "working", in the sense that 100 Th will yield the [statistically] same amount of blocks as 100 Th on a single bitcoind or centralized pool?

Ente
Gabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 01:48:29 PM
 #2065

Yes.

Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 02:15:34 PM
 #2066

The still unanswered question remains:
Is p2pool in fact statistically "working", in the sense that 100 Th will yield the [statistically] same amount of blocks as 100 Th on a single bitcoind or centralized pool?

Ente

I'm beginning to suspect not.
back when the pool was at 91% luck over 90 days, the odds of it having such a poor reward after so much hashing was ~2%.
It's obviously lower than that now. I'm giving it another 48 hours then I'm going back to abcpool  Tongue
Gabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 02:39:15 PM
 #2067

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?
Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 03:20:30 PM
 #2068

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

Yes, what I'm suggesting is that we may be having issues with orphaned blocks or some such issue.
Just saying, the odds of luck as bad as p2pool now displays is less than 1%
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 03:24:52 PM
 #2069

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

All right.

This is what the "luck" graph looks like:

(as can be seen here: http://u.forre.st/p2pool/luck.png)


This is what "variability and luck" would make me expect it look instead:



But, in fact, it looks much more like this, which is not "variability and luck", but a inherent problem besides variability:


The red line is like the average block-finding rate. Do you see the angle between the black "hashes calculated" graph and the red "blocks found" graph? THAT is what I am talking about, not the stochastic ripple in the original blue line, which I crudely smoothed out with the red line.

It does not seem to be caused by block orphans, as people stated before that these are in the low % range. Neither has it anything to do with local orphans or local deads, as these don't add to the (black) "hashes calculated" neither.


I am not confident enough to calculate the "we are losing x % hashingpower" from this graphs, maybe someone else is. To me it seems clear to be a constant "loss", therefore the two graphs resemble two lines with an angle.
My wild guess would be we are effectively losing 15% hashingpower, in the sense that we have 15% less blocks, since 2 months.

Ente

edit: fixed images
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 25, 2012, 03:25:30 PM
 #2070

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

Yes, what I'm suggesting is that we may be having issues with orphaned blocks or some such issue.
Just saying, the odds of luck as bad as p2pool now displays is less than 1%

How are you calculating that?

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 03:30:55 PM
 #2071

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

I am far from suggesting there is any malicious intent in this. This does not make sense at all and contradicts everything I see in this thread.
Of course there won't be a "hey, I found a haxx0r backdoor in line 713 which steals our monies!!". And no, I don't plan to read the code, as I am not knowledgeable to do so.

But, obviously for me, there is a general and (now) constant problem nevertheless. I don't write this to hurt p2pool, the opposite is the case. There are enough outcries and "have to go back to xypool" here to justify a closer look, even without the problem being visible in the luck chart for weeks now.

Ente
spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1376

nec sine labore


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
 #2072

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

All right.

This is what the "luck" graph looks like:
http://s17.postimage.org/pe2oth8vx/luck.png
(as can be seen here: http://u.forre.st/p2pool/luck.png)


This is what "variability and luck" would make me expect it look instead:
http://s17.postimage.org/45p0c1uf1/luck_green.png


But, in fact, it looks much more like this, which is not "variability and luck", but a inherent problem besides variability:
http://s17.postimage.org/rl6xhee65/luck_red.png

...

Ente, I'm not able to see your images, I had to answer your message and copy and paste urls (safari and firefox on a mac).

In this answer I've removed the img tag from the quote so that the url is clickable.

spiccioli
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 06:59:50 PM
 #2073

Ente, I'm not able to see your images, I had to answer your message and copy and paste urls (safari and firefox on a mac).

In this answer I've removed the img tag from the quote so that the url is clickable.

spiccioli

Thanks for the info.
I can see the images fine in that post..
Will check and repair.

Any one else, do you see the three pics?

Ente
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 07:05:27 PM
 #2074

Any one else, do you see the three pics?
I don't see them in your post above.

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
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 07:08:18 PM
 #2075

Strange, I could see the pics in firefox, where I uploaded them with. In another browser I couldnt see them neither.
I reuploaded to another host, hope it works now.

Thanks for the info, you two.

Ente
Smoovious
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504

Scattering my bits around the net since 1980


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 07:42:50 PM
 #2076

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?
Nobody suggested anything suspect in it, just that something may still be wrong.

I have to agree. I'm no statistician, and maybe it would be worth having someone better versed in statistical analysis to pipe in, but if that one line is indeed a projection of what should be expected, and the other line, what we're actually getting, with variance added, we should expect those lines to cross and re-cross in several different places and continue to do so in the future.

The actual results line, when smoothed out, should be pretty close to the projections, but it is spending too much time below the projection, which would imply an issue somewhere with the actual results we're getting.

One thing the graphs do not suggest, which is correct? Is the actual results line reflecting something wrong, and the projection is correct, or is the actual results line correct, and there is something wrong with the calculation for the projection?

Is it possible to make similar graphs for other operating pools as well to compare against?

Nobody is suggesting that there is something hinky going on with the code, but just by looking at the statistics, after this long a run so far, that as long as this pattern continues, there is the increasing likelihood, of something not operating quite right somewhere.

It could just be the projection calculation too, who knows, but it begs looking into.

-- Smoov
ChanceCoats123
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680



View Profile
April 25, 2012, 08:24:16 PM
 #2077

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?
Nobody suggested anything suspect in it, just that something may still be wrong.

I have to agree. I'm no statistician, and maybe it would be worth having someone better versed in statistical analysis to pipe in, but if that one line is indeed a projection of what should be expected, and the other line, what we're actually getting, with variance added, we should expect those lines to cross and re-cross in several different places and continue to do so in the future.

The actual results line, when smoothed out, should be pretty close to the projections, but it is spending too much time below the projection, which would imply an issue somewhere with the actual results we're getting.

One thing the graphs do not suggest, which is correct? Is the actual results line reflecting something wrong, and the projection is correct, or is the actual results line correct, and there is something wrong with the calculation for the projection?

Is it possible to make similar graphs for other operating pools as well to compare against?

Nobody is suggesting that there is something hinky going on with the code, but just by looking at the statistics, after this long a run so far, that as long as this pattern continues, there is the increasing likelihood, of something not operating quite right somewhere.

It could just be the projection calculation too, who knows, but it begs looking into.

-- Smoov


I like the direction he's going. Maybe it's not a pool issue (maybe it is), but it could just be an issue with the graphs projecting incorrect values. Afterall, p2pool.info is an estimate of hashing speeds and such. It's using the estimated speed (based upon shares) to determine the overall speed of the pool and from there calculating the projected block time. I don't know if you have seen your miner's speeds according to p2pool.info, but my miner is 200mhash/sec faster than my cards are actually mining.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 08:55:59 PM
 #2078

The still unanswered question remains:
Is p2pool in fact statistically "working", in the sense that 100 Th will yield the [statistically] same amount of blocks as 100 Th on a single bitcoind or centralized pool?

Ente

I'm beginning to suspect not.
back when the pool was at 91% luck over 90 days, the odds of it having such a poor reward after so much hashing was ~2%.

It was never 2% when @ 91% luck over 90 days.  I will run the probability numbers for current luck.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
 #2079

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?
Nobody suggested anything suspect in it, just that something may still be wrong.

I have to agree. I'm no statistician, and maybe it would be worth having someone better versed in statistical analysis to pipe in, but if that one line is indeed a projection of what should be expected, and the other line, what we're actually getting, with variance added, we should expect those lines to cross and re-cross in several different places and continue to do so in the future.

The actual results line, when smoothed out, should be pretty close to the projections, but it is spending too much time below the projection, which would imply an issue somewhere with the actual results we're getting.

One thing the graphs do not suggest, which is correct? Is the actual results line reflecting something wrong, and the projection is correct, or is the actual results line correct, and there is something wrong with the calculation for the projection?

Is it possible to make similar graphs for other operating pools as well to compare against?

Nobody is suggesting that there is something hinky going on with the code, but just by looking at the statistics, after this long a run so far, that as long as this pattern continues, there is the increasing likelihood, of something not operating quite right somewhere.

It could just be the projection calculation too, who knows, but it begs looking into.

-- Smoov


I like the direction he's going. Maybe it's not a pool issue (maybe it is), but it could just be an issue with the graphs projecting incorrect values. Afterall, p2pool.info is an estimate of hashing speeds and such. It's using the estimated speed (based upon shares) to determine the overall speed of the pool and from there calculating the projected block time. I don't know if you have seen your miner's speeds according to p2pool.info, but my miner is 200mhash/sec faster than my cards are actually mining.
Well, remember that a variance of 8 times is not all that rare when it comes to block times and share times.
So when your talking about a base multiplier of around whatever the difficulty is now (around 650?) your going to be waiting quite a long time before you'll expect to see some convergence on your expected hashrate.

Yesterday I ran an Icarus for over 3 hours on a standard pool and got 105% of my expected 1 difficulty share rate with 380MH/s
Multiply that 3 hours by 650 ...
For the first 5 minutes it was over 120% - not that uncommon also to have it vary a lot early on - again multiply that 5 minutes by 650 ... and you get over 2.25 days

The point of a pool is to reduce variance - and although p2pool does that like every other pool, it's base figures are around 650 times higher due to being 650 difficulty shares. So expect a lot longer to see your expected share rate (i.e. your average can be higher or lower for a lot longer)

(Edit: corrected that hash rate above Tongue)

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
Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
April 25, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
 #2080

Please stop spreading FUD  Roll Eyes P2pool is open source and there is nothing suspect in the code. Do you know what variability and luck is?

Yes, what I'm suggesting is that we may be having issues with orphaned blocks or some such issue.
Just saying, the odds of luck as bad as p2pool now displays is less than 1%

How are you calculating that?

Binomial distribution - couldn't work out an average # for share difficulty throughout the life of p2pool, so took the values for shares submitted vs expected shares required for our current number of blocks from p2pool.info and assumed avg difficulty of 1.5 million. So N=somehugenumber, p=0.00000066667, k=actual shares found/p.

Not the best, but shouldn't be far off.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 ... 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!