Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 04:17:15 AM *
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 ... 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] 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2035494 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
May 02, 2012, 04:18:07 PM
 #2141

Thanks for doing that twmz.  Sadly that isn't what I wanted to hear.

While 80% over 90 days is plausible looking beyond 90 days the likelihood of such a low % becoming increasingly unlikely.

Since inception the pool has found 372 blocks.  Stats for the first block are unknown so we will exclude that.  

# Blocks: 371
Estimated shares in blocks:  619,152,160
Expected shares in blocks:  547,529,631
Lifetime Luck 87.9%
Shares per block relative to expected.  1.13x

I calculate
Actual # of blocks: 371
Expected # of blocks: 422

Mining is a possion distribution.
The odds of having 371 or less events when 422 are expected is 0.71%
http://www.sbrforum.com/betting-tools/poisson-calculator/

There is only a 0.71% chance we are just facing bad luck and a 99.29% chance something is resulting in less blocks found.

I am certain that "something" isn't malicious intent by developer however something is causing us to find less blocks than expected.

A number of theories:
a) some nodes are accidentally not submitting blocks.
b) something in the code is causing valid blocks to not be detected.
c) someone with ~40GH/s is intentionally withholding blocks to damage the network.
d) the stats are inaccurate and twmz observation is coincidental (I don't believe it just included it for completeness)
e) we are finding more blocks but they are being orphaned at a higher rate (>10%) and those orphans aren't being seen by p2pool.info node.
f) there is some bias in SHA-256 hash (unlikely but not impossible) such that low nonce values are less likely to find blocks that higher ones, due to LP p2pool searches more low nonce values
f) someone has found a method to "cheat" the p2pool reward algorithm

Note not all of these are equally likely I am just kinda brainstorming and putting down any possibility no matter how remote.

A couple suggestions:
a) found blocks should be forwarded to all nodes regardless of their staleness (this will aid in troubleshooting if nothing else)
b) some mechanism of recording the exact # of shares per round would be useful.

That being said I can no longer afford to take a 20% haircut on revenue so I will be temporarily leaving p2pool.

On edit:  I will leave one rig on p2pool using new address and attempt to gather detailed stats on shares vs payout.
1481429835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481429835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481429835
Reply with quote  #2

1481429835
Report to moderator
1481429835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481429835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481429835
Reply with quote  #2

1481429835
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481429835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481429835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481429835
Reply with quote  #2

1481429835
Report to moderator
1481429835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481429835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481429835
Reply with quote  #2

1481429835
Report to moderator
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737



View Profile
May 02, 2012, 04:30:15 PM
 #2142

A number of theories:
e) we are finding more blocks but they are being orphaned at a higher rate (>10%) and those orphans aren't being seen by p2pool.info node.

It's certainly possible, but I wanted to add that p2pool.info now also asks blockchain.info for a list of all blocks (including orphaned blocks) that include the p2pool donation address.  I trust that blockchain.info is much more likely to have seen all orphaned blocks (excluding the recent downtime) given that they connect to almost every publicly accessible node.  I think the likelyhood of unnoticed  orphaned blocks is very low at this point.

A couple suggestions:
a) found blocks should be forwarded to all nodes regardless of their staleness (this will aid in troubleshooting)

I believe forrest just commited this change to the git tree last night.

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
May 02, 2012, 09:47:42 PM
 #2143

Another reduction will come from the fact that some % of miners won't have 'submit stale' enabled in whatever they mine with.
No idea how big or small that is, but, of course, that relates directly to what I was mentioning before.

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
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
May 02, 2012, 11:34:16 PM
 #2144

Another reduction will come from the fact that some % of miners won't have 'submit stale' enabled in whatever they mine with.
No idea how big or small that is, but, of course, that relates directly to what I was mentioning before.
Also, when comparing actual payout to expected, make sure not to forget the author donation.  0.5% isn't much, but it still can matter.

mav
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 03:06:11 AM
 #2145

I have a theory that hashrate is being reported incorrectly by p2pool and is skewing the luck calculation. I realise that luck is a comparison of hashes by shares vs hashes in blocks and may not be related to the reported GH/s value, but I thought the numbers below were too compelling not to mention.

My phoenix thread says my hashrate per gpu core is always 380-390 MH/s. It's very consistent. I have 12 cores so that makes for a hashrate range between 4.56 GH/s and 4.68 GH/s

In my p2pool thread I see my total local hashrate usually around 4.8 to 5 GH/s and often up to 5.1 GH/s

Taking the average phoenix hashrate vs the average p2pool hashrate and the result is about 4.62 / 4.9 = 0.94

The most compelling part of all is that I recently switched to ozcoin for a while and they also report my hashrate at around 4.6 GH/s - the reported value by p2pool is never that low.
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 03:45:18 AM
 #2146

Actually ... the luck calculation should be based on shares per block ...
Which I presume it is anyway.

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
ChanceCoats123
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680



View Profile
May 03, 2012, 03:51:36 AM
 #2147

I have a theory that hashrate is being reported incorrectly by p2pool and is skewing the luck calculation. I realise that luck is a comparison of hashes by shares vs hashes in blocks and may not be related to the reported GH/s value, but I thought the numbers below were too compelling not to mention.

My phoenix thread says my hashrate per gpu core is always 380-390 MH/s. It's very consistent. I have 12 cores so that makes for a hashrate range between 4.56 GH/s and 4.68 GH/s

In my p2pool thread I see my total local hashrate usually around 4.8 to 5 GH/s and often up to 5.1 GH/s

Taking the average phoenix hashrate vs the average p2pool hashrate and the result is about 4.62 / 4.9 = 0.94

The most compelling part of all is that I recently switched to ozcoin for a while and they also report my hashrate at around 4.6 GH/s - the reported value by p2pool is never that low.

I had mentioned this before, and I believe someonw responded saying that the reported hashrate from p2pool.info is based upon the shares you have per the time, so you might just been lucky in your share finding which raised the "hashrate" that p2pool saw.
mav
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 04:50:07 AM
 #2148


I had mentioned this before, and I believe someonw responded saying that the reported hashrate from p2pool.info is based upon the shares you have per the time, so you might just been lucky in your share finding which raised the "hashrate" that p2pool saw.

But to be lucky all the time makes it seem like it's an incorrect value and not due to luck. I never saw my p2pool hashrate reflect my phoenix hashrate.

Is the hashrate used in the calculation of luck or is it just 'an indicator that things are happening' for the user?
ChanceCoats123
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680



View Profile
May 03, 2012, 05:49:43 AM
 #2149

There is where it's different for me and you.

My actual is 1250mhash. P2pool.info will give me a range (depending upon when I check) between 1100 and 1500. So that makes sense for me. How long have you been mining?
mav
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 06:19:19 AM
 #2150

p2pool for the past one month solid (on and off with p2pool for a couple of months before that).

started mining about a year ago, using ozcoin and deepbit pools depending on my mood, until the switch to p2pool a few months ago. Sadly I have left p2pool for ozcoin again, I just don't see how a month straight can have that sort of luck. I would rather support p2pool but the luck is a killer. I can take some amount of worse luck to support p2pool, but ozcoin is a great pool so I don't feel bitcoin is loosing anything by my supporting them rather than p2pool.
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2012, 06:21:25 AM
 #2151

you can use a pps p2pool. luck is statistical, you will always make more over a long run, eg. a month.

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

Activity: 168


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 06:38:38 AM
 #2152

Another thing I wanted to point out, perhaps the most obvious of all which is why I forgot to post it before, is I wanted to run a solid month with p2pool to see how my payouts were compared with another pool. In theory, due to variance, over that period of time my payout compared to another pool should be the same.

My payouts with p2pool have been less, around 80% of what I would have if I had mined with deepbit. To clarify, in the past I used the 'Reward estimation' feature on the deepbit site while I was mining with them and it very closely matched my payouts. I have been entering my hashrate (phoenix hashrate not p2pool hashrate) and the estimated payout from deepbit has been between 2.5 and 2.7 btc/day for the whole month. When I work out 2.6 btc * the number of days I've been mining solidly with p2pool, it's about 80% of my actual p2pool payout.

I guess the best way to really confirm this is to set half my miners to p2pool and half to deepbit and compare balances over that period, but I am quite certain that over the past month I have earned less with p2pool mining than if I had been with another pool. I know there are factors like difficulty changing etc so really the approach I have made to this experiment is not a very scientific one, mostly because I planned to mine with p2pool no matter the 'cost', but mining is an economic activity and it doesn't seem like my payout with p2pool is anywhere near the same as with other pools, when in theory it should be.

The point of me posting this is not to detract other users away from p2pool, I just want to try to understand a) whether something is incorrect with the pool and b) if there is, why that is so. I want to see p2pool be as good or better than the other pools so I can join again.
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 06:52:49 AM
 #2153

P2Pool release 0.11.1 tag: 0.11.1 UPGRADE REQUIRED SOON

Windows binary: http://u.forre.st/u/xyewbxrx/p2pool_win32_0.11.1.zip
Source ZIP: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/zipball/0.11.1
Source TAR: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/tarball/0.11.1

This release's sole purpose is to test possible fixes to our luck problems and provide useful data that may also help. It is a mandatory upgrade because it breaks compatibility with previous releases.

Major changes:
* Broadcast all block solutions, bitcoin/p2pool-stale or not, until they're 5 blocks old
* Submit blocks over P2P connection to bitcoind, in addition to RPC
* Automatically report caught exceptions as bug reports

This switchover is different from previous ones - Instead of a scheduled time, all nodes will automatically switch 22 hours after 95% of the P2Pool hash rate has upgraded. Therefore, please upgrade as soon as possible so you're not part of the last 5%!

EDIT: The current proportion of the hash rate upgraded is visible as the "2" line on the last chart at http://forre.st:9332/static/graphs.html
EDIT: Released 0.11.1 with IOCP disabled by default.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2012, 07:05:46 AM
 #2154

Beautiful http://bitpoppool.geekgalaxy.com:9332/static/graphs.html

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

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2012, 07:07:41 AM
 #2155

Is it normal to get stuck at this screen and stop answering? I've already restarted a few times. All the versions do this. Do i wait or keep restarting?
http://screencast.com/t/uVYh9xNKgB5

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

Activity: 510


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 07:09:29 AM
 #2156

Is it normal to get stuck at this screen and stop answering? I've already restarted a few times. All the versions do this. Do i wait or keep restarting?
http://screencast.com/t/uVYh9xNKgB5

What do you mean by "stop answering"? Versions since 0.10.4 on Windows use the IOCP API, which may be causing problems. What version of Windows are you using, and does 0.10.3 run without problems?

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2012, 07:11:31 AM
 #2157

Stop answering to my site graphs and to the miners.
Been having this issue for several versions, I usually restart like 15 times until it works. I'm using 2008 r2 x64

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

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 03, 2012, 07:12:34 AM
 #2158

PS it always does in with the last line showing the hours like 6.2 hrs

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

Activity: 510


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 07:13:21 AM
 #2159

Stop answering to my site graphs and to the miners.
Been having this issue for several versions, I usually restart like 15 times until it works. I'm using 2008 r2 x64

Do you remember specifically which version last worked fine?

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
May 03, 2012, 07:14:23 AM
 #2160

Here's a build that doesn't use IOCP: http://u.forre.st/u/rhkxgsda/p2pool_win32_0.11.0-dirty.zip Can you test that?

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 ... 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!