|
|
|
|
|
"There should not be any signed int. If you've found a signed int
somewhere, please tell me (within the next 25 years please) and I'll
change it to unsigned int." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
 |
May 07, 2012, 06:07:39 PM |
|
If we don't hit another block for a week I'm going to kill you. Never mention good luck. Ever. It's the first rule. LOL. |
|
|
|
|
|
JayCoin
|
|
May 07, 2012, 06:50:27 PM |
|
Maybe consider lower diff a bit and less longpool messages? I haven't share over last 24hrs...
I have only ~170MH/s and most of my worker get works are break by longpool reset.
In description it is about 10s between longpolls but in most cases i get longpool restart every 5s...
Also after upgrading to 11.1 i`m getting ALOT of dead on arrival (about 30% vs under 5% on 10.3), same worker and config.
Since you have a small rig, it might be worth mining at p2pmining.com. He runs a public, merged mining p2pool node with diff 1 shares designed for smaller miners. To get difficulty 1 share at p2pmining.com add a +1 to the end of your username/payout address. Larger miners may find it work better to submit higher difficulty shares. |
Hello There!
|
|
|
|
gyverlb
|
|
May 07, 2012, 06:55:16 PM |
|
OK, who tested his experimental quantum computer running in his basement on p2pool between 5:30PM and 5:35PM GMT today ? 4 blocks in a matter of 3 minutes including one orphan ? Insane luck !
This is at time like this that you can't stop wondering if luck really has no memory...
|
|
|
|
|
echris1
|
|
May 07, 2012, 06:57:46 PM |
|
Did we just orphan our own block? We had 105, then 105 orphaned, then 106.
|
|
|
|
|
|
twmz
|
|
May 07, 2012, 06:58:36 PM |
|
Did we just orphan our own block? We had 105, then 105 orphaned, then 106.
Yes! |
Was I helpful? 1 TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs WoT, GPGBitrated user: ewal. |
|
|
|
ancow
|
|
May 07, 2012, 07:39:25 PM |
|
There seems to be something dodgy going on here: Notice how p2pool keeps passing the same blocks to bitcoind over and over. Seems the orphan didn't want to go down without a fight...  |
BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
|
|
|
|
gyverlb
|
|
May 07, 2012, 08:06:24 PM
Last edit: May 07, 2012, 08:15:28 PM by DiabloD3 |
|
There seems to be something dodgy going on here: I suppose your node is NTP-synced ? My node noticed the blocks like this : 2012-05-07 19:31:17.798942 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! 52bb8595 bitcoin: http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000080aaeb78a2217dae7e1c66f431d48c6c4085026d50c52bb8595
2012-05-07 19:31:17.799030
2012-05-07 19:31:19.374251 New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.999985 Share difficulty: 671.595424 Total block value: 50.106500 BTC including 171 transactions
2012-05-07 19:31:19.540366 P2Pool: 17346 shares in chain (17350 verified/17350 total) Peers: 50 (40 incoming)
2012-05-07 19:31:19.540528 Local: 1460MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~5.9% (3-10%) Expected time to share: 32.8 minutes
2012-05-07 19:31:19.540603 Shares: 136 (8 orphan, 8 dead) Stale rate: ~11.8% (7-19%) Efficiency: ~97.5% (90-103%) Current payout: 0.2078 BTC
2012-05-07 19:31:19.540763 Pool: 322GH/s Stale rate: 9.5% Expected time to block: 5.6 hours
2012-05-07 19:31:20.746810 New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.999985 Share difficulty: 675.393531 Total block value: 50.106500 BTC including 171 transactions
2012-05-07 19:31:22.689407 P2Pool: 17347 shares in chain (17351 verified/17351 total) Peers: 50 (40 incoming)
2012-05-07 19:31:22.689564 Local: 1467MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~6.3% (3-11%) Expected time to share: 32.9 minutes
2012-05-07 19:31:22.689667 Shares: 136 (8 orphan, 8 dead) Stale rate: ~11.8% (7-19%) Efficiency: ~97.8% (90-103%) Current payout: 0.2078 BTC
2012-05-07 19:31:22.689767 Pool: 325GH/s Stale rate: 9.8% Expected time to block: 5.5 hours
2012-05-07 19:31:25.756062 P2Pool: 17347 shares in chain (17351 verified/17351 total) Peers: 50 (40 incoming)
2012-05-07 19:31:25.756237 Local: 1460MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~6.4% (3-11%) Expected time to share: 33.1 minutes
2012-05-07 19:31:25.756316 Shares: 136 (8 orphan, 8 dead) Stale rate: ~11.8% (7-19%) Efficiency: ~97.8% (90-103%) Current payout: 0.2078 BTC
2012-05-07 19:31:25.756401 Pool: 325GH/s Stale rate: 9.8% Expected time to block: 5.5 hours
2012-05-07 19:31:29.498357 P2Pool: 17347 shares in chain (17351 verified/17351 total) Peers: 50 (40 incoming)
2012-05-07 19:31:29.498509 Local: 1445MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~6.4% (3-11%) Expected time to share: 33.4 minutes
2012-05-07 19:31:29.498593 Shares: 136 (8 orphan, 8 dead) Stale rate: ~11.8% (7-19%) Efficiency: ~97.8% (90-103%) Current payout: 0.2078 BTC
2012-05-07 19:31:29.498685 Pool: 325GH/s Stale rate: 9.8% Expected time to block: 5.5 hours
2012-05-07 19:31:32.871357
2012-05-07 19:31:32.871528 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! 58c76780 bitcoin: http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000015e628594f22a190a6ec8ba9c7af57a2c549bd34edd58c76780
I notice 2 things : - my node saw the blocks ~2 seconds later than yours
- there's a ~15 second delay between the two blocks
If you don't run ntpd 2 seconds isn't much, if you do it's a little worrisome : 2 seconds to broadcast such information is high. I'd expect something like 500ms at most. I don't understand how a node could produce an orphaned block 15 seconds after another has been seen by p2pool if things are working correctly. If the node responsible for the orphan block could be found it may be useful to find out what happened from its point of view. |
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1800
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
May 07, 2012, 10:06:26 PM |
|
Well - don't forget the obvious ... Each 'pool' is whatever hardware, network and poorly tuned OS the person running p2pool is using. Thus there can quite obviously be some people running p2pool with major latency issues in their setup. In that case, consider that if they find a block, they are using a 'poorly tuned pool' to get the block out on the net to the block chain and share chain (rather than a low latency highly efficient pool running on high quality hardware with a well tuned OS with lots of network connections ...) What's that comment about chains and weakest links ...  Luckily they wont find blocks very often ... |
|
|
|
|
ancow
|
|
May 07, 2012, 10:24:24 PM |
|
There seems to be something dodgy going on here: Notice how p2pool keeps passing the same blocks to bitcoind over and over. Seems the orphan didn't want to go down without a fight... I suppose your node is NTP-synced ? My node noticed the blocks like this : [snip] I notice 2 things : - my node saw the blocks ~2 seconds later than yours
- there's a ~15 second delay between the two blocks
If you don't run ntpd 2 seconds isn't much, if you do it's a little worrisome : 2 seconds to broadcast such information is high. I'd expect something like 500ms at most. I don't understand how a node could produce an orphaned block 15 seconds after another has been seen by p2pool if things are working correctly. If the node responsible for the orphan block could be found it may be useful to find out what happened from its point of view. [corrected your quote] My node is NTP-synced at midnight, and regularly off by 5s, so 2s by 19:30 isn't too unlikely. Note, however, that the timestamp of each block is ~1 minute after my node received them - and you complain about 2s?  Anyway, my point was more that all that passing ancient blocks to bitcoind is kinda buggy. Does bitcoind do anything drastic when a peer keeps sending the same block over and over? |
BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
|
|
|
|
twmz
|
|
May 07, 2012, 11:20:49 PM |
|
Anyway, my point was more that all that passing ancient blocks to bitcoind is kinda buggy. Does bitcoind do anything drastic when a peer keeps sending the same block over and over?
It's wouldn't call it buggy since it's doing exactly what it was designed to do: when a peer announces a block, p2pool passes it on to the local bitcoin node. It's apparently just simplistic and doesn't attempt to keep track of blocks that it already told the local node about. Also, the recent update just made p2pool more agressive about telling peers about blocks and so maybe you're seeing more messages about them. I don't think it hurts anything and I wouldn't change it since agressive distribution of blocks is a good thing in order to reduce orphaned blocks (which we have had more than our fair share of). |
Was I helpful? 1 TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs WoT, GPGBitrated user: ewal. |
|
|
|
Smoovious
|
|
May 08, 2012, 12:13:59 AM |
|
Also have to keep in mind, that blocks and shares don't propogate instantly, being a decentralized network.
When one of us finds a block, it is relayed to the network more like ripples on a pond. Your P2P tells at least 10 friends, and their P2P's tell at least 10 friends, and so on and so on. Depending on how many nodes there are, it could take a long time (relatively speaking) for every node to get the new block.
If another node also solves a block before the first block's ripple reaches it, it sends out its own ripples, and eventually those ripples meet and try and cancel each other out, like the earlier poster saw with it going back and forth, until the stronger ripple has dissapated the weaker ripple, resulting in the orphan.
-- Smoov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tittiez
|
|
May 08, 2012, 12:49:04 AM |
|
NOBODY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE L WORD
|
|
|
|
|
|
iopq
|
|
May 08, 2012, 01:51:08 AM |
|
NOBODY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE L WORD
First rule of p2pool: you do not talk about luck Second rule of p2pool: you DO NOT talk about luck |
|
|
|
|
|
ChanceCoats123
|
|
May 08, 2012, 02:09:17 AM |
|
NOBODY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE L WORD
First rule of p2pool: you do not talk about luck Second rule of p2pool: you DO NOT talk about luck Such a great movie. |
|
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
May 08, 2012, 03:16:12 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoovious
|
|
May 08, 2012, 03:25:05 PM |
|
Alright, I can bring the noose and a chair, but someone is gonna have to bring the tree... -- Smoov |
|
|
|
|
|
Tittiez
|
|
May 09, 2012, 02:43:00 AM |
|
Alright, I can bring the noose and a chair, but someone is gonna have to bring the tree...
-- Smoov
Leaching off your Litecoin P2Pool node, thanks! |
|
|
|
|
bitpop
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
|
|
May 09, 2012, 02:44:50 AM |
|
Lynching off your Litecoin P2Pool node, thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Smoovious
|
|
May 09, 2012, 11:31:17 AM |
|
Leaching off your Litecoin P2Pool node, thanks!
Oh! hey, cool! Thanks, the more the merrier XD -- Smoov |
|
|
|
|
|
