Bitcoin Forum
May 21, 2019, 08:02:04 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 [171] 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2576193 times)
misterbigg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001



View Profile
September 04, 2012, 08:10:39 PM
 #3401

It bothers me that Gavin has try to convince Tycho (of deepbit) of his multi-sig proposal before he can implement it, because if deepbit decides to not use the new code, it's dead in the water.

As opposed to having to convince the author of cgminer to implement it, and then get all the p2pool users to upgrade?
1558468924
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558468924

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558468924
Reply with quote  #2

1558468924
Report to moderator
1558468924
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558468924

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558468924
Reply with quote  #2

1558468924
Report to moderator
1558468924
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558468924

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558468924
Reply with quote  #2

1558468924
Report to moderator
Get alert of price pumps/dumps beforehand 74% average Win Rate
reported by our users
TRY NOW!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1558468924
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558468924

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558468924
Reply with quote  #2

1558468924
Report to moderator
1558468924
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558468924

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558468924
Reply with quote  #2

1558468924
Report to moderator
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2814
Merit: 1165


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 04, 2012, 09:54:27 PM
 #3402

It bothers me that Gavin has try to convince Tycho (of deepbit) of his multi-sig proposal before he can implement it, because if deepbit decides to not use the new code, it's dead in the water.

As opposed to having to convince the author of cgminer to implement it, and then get all the p2pool users to upgrade?

Eh?
Other than that being a quote from 8 months ago ... what has it to do with cgminer?

Or have you misquoted and are referring to moving all the pool work into cgminer coz some fools came up with the idea of doing that rather than fixing the size of the nonce? Cheesy

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2012, 06:39:30 PM
 #3403

Some orphans now from people with horrible connections.  

I know blockchain.info is missing tons of IPs and isn't very accurate, but if you see an orphaned block that was only relayed to a couple nodes, then you know there must have been a good 10-15 seconds in there before it was broadcast.

Why not use a p2pool with a decent connection that'll have a nice up-to-the-second bitcoind?  It wouldn't result in any more rejects or orphans, would it?  

Hmm, unless the problem is a bitcoind that doesn't allow incoming connections and only has 8 outgoing (and not to any good nodes)..   time to make use of addnode?  Might I suggest 5.9.24.81?  My max is 1000.

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2450
Merit: 1015



View Profile
September 05, 2012, 08:43:53 PM
 #3404

Some orphans now from people with horrible connections.  

I know blockchain.info is missing tons of IPs and isn't very accurate, but if you see an orphaned block that was only relayed to a couple nodes, then you know there must have been a good 10-15 seconds in there before it was broadcast.

Why not use a p2pool with a decent connection that'll have a nice up-to-the-second bitcoind?  It wouldn't result in any more rejects or orphans, would it?  

Hmm, unless the problem is a bitcoind that doesn't allow incoming connections and only has 8 outgoing (and not to any good nodes)..   time to make use of addnode?  Might I suggest 5.9.24.81?  My max is 1000.
There is a known problem with Bitcoin relaying blocks. Every step of relaying a block, the node needs to 1) finish downloading it completely, 2) verify the block header and ALL transactions are valid, and 3) upload the entire block to the each peer node in sequence.

The obvious (but very non-trivial to implement with Satoshi's codebase) solution is to parallelize block distribution; that is, as soon as you receive the 80 byte block header:
  • verify it is
    • a valid header
    • the header for a block after the most recent one
    • meets the required difficulty
  • immediately send all peers the "incoming block" message
  • upload the block to peers as fast as they can take it, as it is received
Then, distribution is accomplished in realtime, and all the bottleneck remaining is restricted to verifying transactions locally on each node.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2814
Merit: 1165


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 05, 2012, 11:40:34 PM
 #3405

... or as I've stated before ...
Only transfer the block header, coinbase txn and merkle tree by default then get the recipient to say if it wants the transactions and which ones (a list) from the merkle tree.
Most bitcoinds already have ALL txn but the coinbase, so that is a massive waste and always has been.
Secondly, why are the txn's re-validated, shouldn't they have been validated when they were received the first time?

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
September 06, 2012, 12:41:24 AM
 #3406

... or as I've stated before ...
Only transfer the block header, coinbase txn and merkle tree by default then get the recipient to say if it wants the transactions and which ones (a list) from the merkle tree.
Most bitcoinds already have ALL txn but the coinbase, so that is a massive waste and always has been.
Secondly, why are the txn's re-validated, shouldn't they have been validated when they were received the first time?

I'm certainly by far not an expert at this.. but I would assume that you there is a "trust no one" factor here, you can't safely assuming incoming transactions are validated already.

M

I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent!  Come join me!
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2450
Merit: 1015



View Profile
September 06, 2012, 12:56:24 AM
 #3407

... or as I've stated before ...
Only transfer the block header, coinbase txn and merkle tree by default then get the recipient to say if it wants the transactions and which ones (a list) from the merkle tree.
Most bitcoinds already have ALL txn but the coinbase, so that is a massive waste and always has been.
Secondly, why are the txn's re-validated, shouldn't they have been validated when they were received the first time?

I'm certainly by far not an expert at this.. but I would assume that you there is a "trust no one" factor here, you can't safely assuming incoming transactions are validated already.
He meant the clients might have already seen the transaction broadcast before, so would have validated it themselves already. That is indeed already cached, but there are a lot of transactions that don't get seen by any given node (about 10% IIRC), and the back-and-forth of requesting missing transactions would add delays - though it might make sense on top of the basic block distribution parallelization I mentioned, but it will need to be benchmarked.

zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
September 06, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
 #3408

what the devil

2012-09-06 06:53:54.077480 GOT BLOCK FROM MINER! Passing to bitcoind! http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000013fcf0d071e54c00838654cc2328b463bea33894ed51eec96dd
2012-09-06 06:53:54.101687 GOT SHARE!  1eec96dd prev 699c48c8 age 8.58s DEAD ON ARRIVAL

http://nogleg.com:9332/static/share.html#000000000000013fcf0d071e54c00838654cc2328b463bea33894ed51eec96dd

ok, so i knew it did it with orphans, but 'dead on arrival'?

(ed: hmm, no, that's not it...  bizarre)

it looks like i trumped myself by it being passed to bitcoind and acknowledged there first?

rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1360
Merit: 1000


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile WWW
September 06, 2012, 12:44:49 PM
 #3409

what the devil

2012-09-06 06:53:54.077480 GOT BLOCK FROM MINER! Passing to bitcoind! http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000013fcf0d071e54c00838654cc2328b463bea33894ed51eec96dd
2012-09-06 06:53:54.101687 GOT SHARE!  1eec96dd prev 699c48c8 age 8.58s DEAD ON ARRIVAL

http://nogleg.com:9332/static/share.html#000000000000013fcf0d071e54c00838654cc2328b463bea33894ed51eec96dd

ok, so i knew it did it with orphans, but 'dead on arrival'?

(ed: hmm, no, that's not it...  bizarre)

it looks like i trumped myself by it being passed to bitcoind and acknowledged there first?
It IS possible Smiley
P2pool is checking every share because every can BE a block solution, but not every share can fit into p2pool share chain because of fast long pooling.
Thats why it is crucial to miner software send stale shares Smiley Sometimes orphaned/doa share CAN be a bitcoin block Smiley
This way you only lost one pool share, but get block Smiley

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
Some stuff on https://github.com/Rav3nPL/
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2814
Merit: 1165


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 06, 2012, 05:49:57 PM
 #3410

... or as I've stated before ...
Only transfer the block header, coinbase txn and merkle tree by default then get the recipient to say if it wants the transactions and which ones (a list) from the merkle tree.
Most bitcoinds already have ALL txn but the coinbase, so that is a massive waste and always has been.
Secondly, why are the txn's re-validated, shouldn't they have been validated when they were received the first time?

I'm certainly by far not an expert at this.. but I would assume that you there is a "trust no one" factor here, you can't safely assuming incoming transactions are validated already.
He meant the clients might have already seen the transaction broadcast before, so would have validated it themselves already. That is indeed already cached, but there are a lot of transactions that don't get seen by any given node (about 10% IIRC), and the back-and-forth of requesting missing transactions would add delays - though it might make sense on top of the basic block distribution parallelization I mentioned, but it will need to be benchmarked.
Well the request would simply be a full request (from the merkle tree) of the missing transactions.
A single request not multiple.
Very simply to know what is missing since the merkle tree lists all the txns and thus the reply would be those at the bottom of the tree you don't already have.

As for 10%? Where do you get that figure from?

I wrote a little transaction processing module to add to bitcoind (that I run all the time), that, among other things, specifically tells me the number of missing transactions.
After about a day from a restart, it was EXTREMELY rare for it to not have every txn except of course the coinbase (which no one will already have except the person/pool who found the block - and why of course I said that should always be sent)

I'd very much doubt that 10% number.
However, even if it was as extremely high as 10%, it would be way faster to send back a reply of 10% of the transaction numbers, then get those 10%, than sending the full 100% every time when 90% of them are unnecessary.

As for the memory pool txn's - why would there be a txn in there that wasn't already verified?
What extra verification is done when the txn's are received with a new block that isn't already done as each txn comes in?

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
September 07, 2012, 07:14:00 AM
 #3411

... or as I've stated before ...
Only transfer the block header, coinbase txn and merkle tree by default then get the recipient to say if it wants the transactions and which ones (a list) from the merkle tree.
Most bitcoinds already have ALL txn but the coinbase, so that is a massive waste and always has been.
Secondly, why are the txn's re-validated, shouldn't they have been validated when they were received the first time?

I'm certainly by far not an expert at this.. but I would assume that you there is a "trust no one" factor here, you can't safely assuming incoming transactions are validated already.
He meant the clients might have already seen the transaction broadcast before, so would have validated it themselves already. That is indeed already cached, but there are a lot of transactions that don't get seen by any given node (about 10% IIRC), and the back-and-forth of requesting missing transactions would add delays - though it might make sense on top of the basic block distribution parallelization I mentioned, but it will need to be benchmarked.
Well the request would simply be a full request (from the merkle tree) of the missing transactions.
A single request not multiple.
Very simply to know what is missing since the merkle tree lists all the txns and thus the reply would be those at the bottom of the tree you don't already have.

As for 10%? Where do you get that figure from?

I wrote a little transaction processing module to add to bitcoind (that I run all the time), that, among other things, specifically tells me the number of missing transactions.
After about a day from a restart, it was EXTREMELY rare for it to not have every txn except of course the coinbase (which no one will already have except the person/pool who found the block - and why of course I said that should always be sent)

I'd very much doubt that 10% number.
However, even if it was as extremely high as 10%, it would be way faster to send back a reply of 10% of the transaction numbers, then get those 10%, than sending the full 100% every time when 90% of them are unnecessary.

As for the memory pool txn's - why would there be a txn in there that wasn't already verified?
What extra verification is done when the txn's are received with a new block that isn't already done as each txn comes in?
well, you probably have more connections than the avg bitcoin user.

many will only have 8

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2814
Merit: 1165


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 07, 2012, 08:42:11 AM
 #3412

...
well, you probably have more connections than the avg bitcoin user.

many will only have 8
9 on my main one and 8 on my secondary one Smiley

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
BR0KK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 07, 2012, 08:37:31 PM
Last edit: September 07, 2012, 08:52:23 PM by BR0KK
 #3413

im trying p2pool now Smiley

I have sucessfuly installed it on my win 7 machine and im pointing 200MH/s to it.


How do the statistics work? They are not displaying anything atm? (Does this need time?)

I want to use P2Pool, bitcoind and my miner on three separate machines. HOw can i get this to work?

Code:
P2Pool: 17433 shares in chain (17222 verified/17437 total) Peers: 10 (0 incoming)
 Local: 250MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~0.0% (0-10%) Expected time to share: 2.9 hours
 Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Stale rate: ??? Efficiency: ??? Current payout: 0.0000 BTC
 Pool: 277GH/s Stale rate: 6.7% Expected time to block: 11.6 hours
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.999985 Share difficulty: 591.506619 Total block value: 50.511625 BTC including 622 transactions

What does this mean? is it working properly?


Thx for hlp Smiley

tiberiandusk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 576
Merit: 500


The North Remembers


View Profile WWW
September 07, 2012, 11:45:38 PM
 #3414

Looks like it is working correctly. Go to http://127.0.0.1:9332 in your browser to see some more info. You can run P2Pool on one computer and direct your miners to that computer's IP address instead of the localhost address.

Bitcoin Auction House http://www.BitBid.net BTC - 1EwfBVC6BwA6YeqcYZmm3htwykK3MStW6N | LTC - LdBpJJHj4WSAsUqaTbwyJQFiG1tVjo4Uys Don't get Goxed.
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
September 07, 2012, 11:53:31 PM
 #3415

im trying p2pool now Smiley

I have sucessfuly installed it on my win 7 machine and im pointing 200MH/s to it.


How do the statistics work? They are not displaying anything atm? (Does this need time?)

I want to use P2Pool, bitcoind and my miner on three separate machines. HOw can i get this to work?

Code:
P2Pool: 17433 shares in chain (17222 verified/17437 total) Peers: 10 (0 incoming)
 Local: 250MH/s in last 10.0 minutes Local dead on arrival: ~0.0% (0-10%) Expected time to share: 2.9 hours
 Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Stale rate: ??? Efficiency: ??? Current payout: 0.0000 BTC
 Pool: 277GH/s Stale rate: 6.7% Expected time to block: 11.6 hours
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.999985 Share difficulty: 591.506619 Total block value: 50.511625 BTC including 622 transactions

What does this mean? is it working properly?


Thx for hlp Smiley

With that small hash rate, you might want to check out p2pmining.com.  It seems to work better for smaller miners, and you get merged mining.

M

I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent!  Come join me!
BR0KK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 08, 2012, 04:46:53 AM
 #3416

i have more to point towards p2pool--> about 4 GHs!

Wanted to try first, to understand how it works Smiley

rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1360
Merit: 1000


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile WWW
September 08, 2012, 07:48:30 AM
 #3417

i have more to point towards p2pool--> about 4 GHs!

Wanted to try first, to understand how it works Smiley
Yes, it is working correctly.
On current pool rate you should get share about every 3hrs (using 250MH power).
If you want point more miners to your pool on local network just point miners to http://ip.of.your.node:9332, just be sure that you have port 9332 open.
Also try open port 9333 for incoming connection to get faster info about p2pool shares and new bitcoin blocks.

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
Some stuff on https://github.com/Rav3nPL/
doubleganger
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 08, 2012, 12:11:28 PM
 #3418

I have two jalapenos on pre-order and was wondering if it would be a waste of time to go ahead and try to get set up using cpu mining just to have the set up partly done when the jalapenos get here (if they ever do, that is)? For one thing, I wouldn't want to do anything that would negatively impact the pool. I realize I probably wouldn't get ANY bitcoin from it. Please excuse me if this has already been asked.
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
September 08, 2012, 12:49:36 PM
 #3419

I have two jalapenos on pre-order and was wondering if it would be a waste of time to go ahead and try to get set up using cpu mining just to have the set up partly done when the jalapenos get here (if they ever do, that is)? For one thing, I wouldn't want to do anything that would negatively impact the pool. I realize I probably wouldn't get ANY bitcoin from it. Please excuse me if this has already been asked.

I would not use CPU mining.

M

I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent!  Come join me!
doubleganger
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 08, 2012, 01:44:28 PM
 #3420

Thanks.  The setup would probably be different enough that it wouldn't gain  me anything anyway.
Pages: « 1 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 [171] 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 ... 814 »
  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!