[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool

[mdude77]

EDIT: I am seeing now some console output looking like this

2012-08-23 12:51:08.201806 > Worker 1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx @ ##.##.##.## submitted share more than once!

Is this normal? (I see it more than once, presumably once per time they submitted the share, or maybe once per each tiem other than the first time that they submitted the share.) Or is it something they can correct at their end?

-MarkM-

This was fixed in a newer version of p2pool.

M

[Smoovious]

I have been asked how p2pool knows how to pay third party miners who connect to it, and neither the wiki page nr the github page seems to say how that is done. I took a wild ass guess that its done by using a bitcoin address as username but is that correct?

-MarkM-

Yes.  When shares are submitted, they get credited to the address specified in the username (or to the default address if the username is not an address).

However, if you have your fee set to 100%, then 100% of the shares mined, by everybody, gets credited to the default bitcoin address p2pool is using for yourself. You have to leave your fee set to 0%, for your guest miners to get their full payout of bitcoin they have mined.

Set it to 1%, and 1 out of 100 of the shares they find, will be credited to you instead, randomly.

-- Smoov

[Smoovious]

My provider is Comcast, and I believe we only have a DL limit. When I looked at my account & bill settings online, it showed less than the 250GB limit for the past 3 months, and I'm only at 64gb this month. I don't think they UL is even measured for me.  

The Comcast/Xfinity limit has been suspended.

Under Users & Settings...

"Note: enforcement of the 250GB data consumption threshold is currently suspended."

I know. The point of me saying that was to show I wasn't anywhere near "high" network utilization like the other member mentioned.

My utilization was based on other traffic I generate too... like when I'm streaming audio/video streams...

-- Smoov

[markm]

EDIT: I am seeing now some console output looking like this

2012-08-23 12:51:08.201806 > Worker 1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx @ ##.##.##.## submitted share more than once!

Is this normal? (I see it more than once, presumably once per time they submitted the share, or maybe once per each tiem other than the first time that they submitted the share.) Or is it something they can correct at their end?

-MarkM-

This was fixed in a newer version of p2pool.

M

How many hours ago? It is not many hours yet since I pulled from github earlier today... I am using version 3.3 I think or something like that due to that pull.

-MarkM-

[mdude77]

EDIT: I am seeing now some console output looking like this

2012-08-23 12:51:08.201806 > Worker 1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx @ ##.##.##.## submitted share more than once!

Is this normal? (I see it more than once, presumably once per time they submitted the share, or maybe once per each tiem other than the first time that they submitted the share.) Or is it something they can correct at their end?

-MarkM-

This was fixed in a newer version of p2pool.

M

How many hours ago? It is not many hours yet since I pulled from github earlier today... I am using version 3.3 I think or something like that due to that pull.

-MarkM-

It was a long time ago that fixed it for me.  Might need to upgrade your miner too.  I'm using cgminer, 2.6.6 is the latest stable version it seems, I'm on 2.7.4 for now.

M

[kano]

...
How many hours ago? It is not many hours yet since I pulled from github earlier today... I am using version 3.3 I think or something like that due to that pull.

-MarkM-

It was a long time ago that fixed it for me.  Might need to upgrade your miner too.  I'm using cgminer, 2.6.6 is the latest stable version it seems, I'm on 2.7.4 for now.

M

Many moons ago p2pool tried to get it right ...
And if you look at the API 'stats' in 2.7.4 it will also tell you what is going on with the roll time information
(there are 4 fields describing it)

[Naelr]

Is it crazy to see 6.3 gigs upload as a result of P2Pool traffic?  BTC and LTC?

I do know I'd been running into my data cap (150GB per month) almost every month in the recent months that I was running p2pool. I'm not entirely sure that p2pool was the cause though.

Maybe check on the # of connections you guys are allowing, both in p2pool, and in your daemons, and cut them down more.

That should drop the cumulative bandwidth used.

-- Smoov

ps: You have a data cap? ... Does the data cap only count on traffic that goes outside of our network? Do you get free in-network traffic?

NO I have no data cap but they do tend to email me from time to time and say that 168 gigs of download is above the average users hahah... I rebooted machine last night ...  It has been up for 20 hours 11 minutes and uploaded 1.6 Gigs of data... recieved 371 Megs... isn't that a bit excessive... I Might shut down my p2pool nodes and see if it is that before I start blaming p2pool...

Naelr

[Gabi]

Lol are you joking or what? You pay for that connection, you better use it, or you want to give your ISP money for free? "Here ISP, take my money and don't worry i won't use my connection, i promise! 

They emailing you? 

[Schleicher]

Looks like something is broken in p2pool 982a81a with bitcoin-next-20120813

Code:

2012-08-24 17:07:49.281000 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! 2bd3ca75 bitcoin: http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000002a43f189eff39d5a2a12141c8bf03e9c5f2b7e958f22bd3ca75
2012-08-24 17:07:49.281000 
2012-08-24 17:07:56.862000 ... done processing 501 shares. New: 501 Have: 26844/~17280
2012-08-24 17:07:56.862000 Requesting parent share 3d1a7c39 from 91.235.254.37:9333
2012-08-24 17:07:56.893000 P2Pool: 17312 shares in chain (10132 verified/26844 total) Peers: 10 (0 incoming)
2012-08-24 17:07:56.893000  Local: 0H/s in last 0.0 seconds Local dead on arrival: ??? Expected time to share: ???
2012-08-24 17:07:56.893000  Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Stale rate: ??? Efficiency: ??? Current payout: 0.0000 BTC
2012-08-24 17:07:56.893000  Pool: 316GH/s Stale rate: 6.0% Expected time to block: 8.3 hours
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 > Error submitting block: (will retry)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 551, in _runCallbacks
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     current.result = callback(current.result, *args, **kw)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1101, in gotResult
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1043, in _inlineCallbacks
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\python\failure.py", line 382, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 > --- <exception caught here> ---
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "D:\forrestv-p2pool\forrestv-p2pool-982a81a\p2pool\util\deferral.py", line 41, in f
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     result = yield func(*args, **kwargs)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1043, in _inlineCallbacks
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\python\failure.py", line 382, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "D:\forrestv-p2pool\forrestv-p2pool-982a81a\p2pool\main.py", line 306, in submit_block_rpc
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     result = yield bitcoind.rpc_submitblock(bitcoin_data.block_type.pack(block).encode('hex'))
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1043, in _inlineCallbacks
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "C:\Python27-64\lib\site-packages\twisted\python\failure.py", line 382, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb)
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >   File "D:\forrestv-p2pool\forrestv-p2pool-982a81a\p2pool\util\jsonrpc.py", line 71, in callRemote
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 >     raise Error_for_code(resp['error']['code'])(resp['error']['message'], resp['error'].get('data', None))
2012-08-24 17:07:57.049000 > p2pool.util.jsonrpc.NarrowError: -32601 Method not found

[Naelr]

Lol are you joking or what? You pay for that connection, you better use it, or you want to give your ISP money for free? "Here ISP, take my money and don't worry i won't use my connection, i promise! 

They emailing you? 

I got one email suggesting there might be malware on my internal network to account for the "over-usage" but nothing more then saying hey your higher then the average person, and I could give 2 shits if they think I am being excessive and I don't care that I upped that much I just thought it was excessive and wanted explanation  .... and my mother-in-law lives with us and netflix is her entertainment so I can't have the cable modem being saturated on the upstream all the time.

[racerguy]

Lol are you joking or what? You pay for that connection, you better use it, or you want to give your ISP money for free? "Here ISP, take my money and don't worry i won't use my connection, i promise! 

They emailing you? 

I got one email suggesting there might be malware on my internal network to account for the "over-usage" but nothing more then saying hey your higher then the average person, and I could give 2 shits if they think I am being excessive and I don't care that I upped that much I just thought it was excessive and wanted explanation  .... and my mother-in-law lives with us and netflix is her entertainment so I can't have the cable modem being saturated on the upstream all the time.

If you don't forward the bitcoin port from your router or disable upnp in your bitcoind you'll only be able to make outgoing connections to the network, that will stop bitcoind from using any real upload bandwidth (except when someone in the p2pool network finds a block which is only about 3x/day).

[Krak]

If you don't forward the bitcoin port from your router or disable upnp in your bitcoind you'll only be able to make outgoing connections to the network, that will stop bitcoind from using any real upload bandwidth (except when someone in the p2pool network finds a block which is only about 3x/day).

Or just set your max connections in your bitcoin.conf. I set mine to 10 so I can still have the port open without my network getting bogged down.

[streblo]

Hi forrestv,

There is a lot of interest in partial confirmations of transactions and p2pool has been proposed as a reasonable solution (see here). Specifically, the p2pool sharechain could guarantee that it will include a given txn in its next block (barring a conflicting transaction sneaking into the blockchain). Could you please comment on the feasibility of implementing such functionality into p2pool? What about the benefit? Does p2pool guaranteeing the inclusion of a txn provide any real benefit over sending your txn to the network and waiting for the majority of nodes to get it?

Thanks!

[Gabi]

If you don't forward the bitcoin port from your router or disable upnp in your bitcoind you'll only be able to make outgoing connections to the network, that will stop bitcoind from using any real upload bandwidth (except when someone in the p2pool network finds a block which is only about 3x/day).

Or just set your max connections in your bitcoin.conf. I set mine to 10 so I can still have the port open without my network getting bogged down.

I wonder why it's so hard for them to put all these options in the GUI

[Naelr]

If you don't forward the bitcoin port from your router or disable upnp in your bitcoind you'll only be able to make outgoing connections to the network, that will stop bitcoind from using any real upload bandwidth (except when someone in the p2pool network finds a block which is only about 3x/day).

Or just set your max connections in your bitcoin.conf. I set mine to 10 so I can still have the port open without my network getting bogged down.

that is exactly what  I did and all is better with the world!

[Frizz23]

After luck improved I started using p2pool again (version 3.1 on win7x64). My hashrate is 840MH/s.

I ran it 24/7 for 3 weeks.

While it looked very promising at first - I got a constantly ~0.15 BTC per block - my reward started to decrease about 10 days ago. I got less and less for each block. At the moment it's only 0.03 BTC per block.

[EDIT] I just noticed that there were block where I got no reward at all. So it's like this over time: 0.15, 0.10, 0.7, 0.3, 0.0, 0.0 ...

First I thought it's a problem with my miner (cgminer 2.6.4) - so I restarted it.

But I still only get a reward of 0.03 BTC per block.

So p2pool must be the problem here.

Any ideas?

[mdude77]

After luck improved I started using p2pool again (version 3.1 on win7x64). My hashrate is 840MH/s.

I ran it 24/7 for 3 weeks.

While it looked very promising at first - I got a constantly ~0.15 BTC per block - my reward started to decrease about 10 days ago. I got less and less for each block. At the moment it's only 0.03 BTC per block.

First I thought it's a problem with my miner (cgminer 2.6.4) - so I restarted it.

But I still only get a reward of 0.03 BTC per block.

So p2pool must be the problem here.

Any ideas?

If it was your miner, it'll take 24 hours for your reward to increase.

Also, I know my rate varies from .8 to .9, roughly.  It seems to cycle, like a sine wave.  It's very peculiar, the entire hash rate across bitcoin seems to vary like that.

M

[lenny_]

After luck improved I started using p2pool again (version 3.1 on win7x64). My hashrate is 840MH/s.

I ran it 24/7 for 3 weeks.

While it looked very promising at first - I got a constantly ~0.15 BTC per block - my reward started to decrease about 10 days ago. I got less and less for each block. At the moment it's only 0.03 BTC per block.

First I thought it's a problem with my miner (cgminer 2.6.4) - so I restarted it.

But I still only get a reward of 0.03 BTC per block.

So p2pool must be the problem here.

Any ideas?

With 840 MH/s, you are getting 0.39/day (on 100% luck). Check if your average is close to it. Block reward doesn't matter, your average reward matter.

[Ente]

Hi forrestv,

There is a lot of interest in partial confirmations of transactions and p2pool has been proposed as a reasonable solution (see here). Specifically, the p2pool sharechain could guarantee that it will include a given txn in its next block (barring a conflicting transaction sneaking into the blockchain). Could you please comment on the feasibility of implementing such functionality into p2pool? What about the benefit? Does p2pool guaranteeing the inclusion of a txn provide any real benefit over sending your txn to the network and waiting for the majority of nodes to get it?

Thanks!

Are you talking about something like regular unconfirmed transactions floating around the bitcoin network, waiting for inclusion into the next block?
So you would like to have p2pool say "we got this tx, will include it soon!"?

I don't see the advantage..
You can already see these [bitcoin] tx in your bitcoind (no idea if possible in a stock bitcoind) or on one of the pages, blockexplorer or the like. android bitcoin wallet shows tx too.
Now, seeing that tx there, or having additionally p2pool say to include it, makes no difference: as soon as someone else creates a conflicting tx, like a doublespend, and his tx gets included into the chain first (higher fees, quicker propagation, luck, he mined the next block himself), your original tx is down the toilet anyway.
p2pool is relatively small, so even if p2pool says "yep, will include your tx" as well as "..and we'll drop any future conflicting tx", it would only work if no other pool/miner finds the next block first and includes the unwanted conflicting tx.

So, what is your aim?

Ente

[Frizz23]

With 840 MH/s, you are getting 0.39/day (on 100% luck). Check if your average is close to it. Block reward doesn't matter, your average reward matter.

I didn't get any reward on the last few blocks. cgminer was running. p2pool was running.