Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 12:43:26 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 ... 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 [223] 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2028681 times)
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
January 20, 2013, 12:31:09 AM
 #4441

p2pool's main problem is being penalized for including transactions.

P2pool miners are protecting the network against >50% attacks. That is a HUGE benefit for the bitcoin network.
Although the concept sounds good, since p2pool is only around 300-400GH/s - it really isn't protecting anything

... and if p2pool miners do as you suggest below, the larger pools, that include more transactions, are indeed better for BTC ...

Quote
Most p2pool users don't have the powerful servers and gigabit internet connections, so they should not include every possible 0-fee or 0.0005 BTC/kB transaction. It's not a huge problem if we leave that to the centralized pools.

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
1480725806
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480725806

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480725806
Reply with quote  #2

1480725806
Report to moderator
1480725806
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480725806

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480725806
Reply with quote  #2

1480725806
Report to moderator
1480725806
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480725806

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480725806
Reply with quote  #2

1480725806
Report to moderator
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480725806
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480725806

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480725806
Reply with quote  #2

1480725806
Report to moderator
1480725806
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480725806

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480725806
Reply with quote  #2

1480725806
Report to moderator
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
January 20, 2013, 12:59:26 AM
 #4442

p2pool's main problem is being penalized for including transactions.

P2pool miners are protecting the network against >50% attacks. That is a HUGE benefit for the bitcoin network.
Although the concept sounds good, since p2pool is only around 300-400GH/s - it really isn't protecting anything

... and if p2pool miners do as you suggest below, the larger pools, that include more transactions, are indeed better for BTC ...

Quote
Most p2pool users don't have the powerful servers and gigabit internet connections, so they should not include every possible 0-fee or 0.0005 BTC/kB transaction. It's not a huge problem if we leave that to the centralized pools.
And I thought forrest made it so that the transactions are really quickly between peers anyways, so are miners really still being penalized?

zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
January 20, 2013, 02:15:51 AM
 #4443

p2pool's main problem is being penalized for including transactions.

P2pool miners are protecting the network against >50% attacks. That is a HUGE benefit for the bitcoin network.
Although the concept sounds good, since p2pool is only around 300-400GH/s - it really isn't protecting anything

... and if p2pool miners do as you suggest below, the larger pools, that include more transactions, are indeed better for BTC ...

Quote
Most p2pool users don't have the powerful servers and gigabit internet connections, so they should not include every possible 0-fee or 0.0005 BTC/kB transaction. It's not a huge problem if we leave that to the centralized pools.
And I thought forrest made it so that the transactions are really quickly between peers anyways, so are miners really still being penalized?
i'd think that it would be moved in a way that wouldnt involve that much more data, but you can see a clear difference in orphans when you set your blocksize to 1000 vs 250000.    though i'd go for something like 5000 so it can cherry pick the occasional huge fees.

anyway, re: memory leak, check this bad boy out:

http://5.9.157.150:9332/static/graphs.html?Month

maybe it has something to do with DOA shares?

Dacentec, best deals for US dedicated servers. They regularly restock $20-$25 Opterons with 8-16GB RAM & 2x1-2TB HDD's (ofc, usually lots of other good stuff to choose from).  I did a Serverbear benchmark of one of my $20/mo Opteron (June last year), it's here.  Have had about a half dozen different servers with Dacentec, & none have failed to sustain at least 40MB/s (burst higher). My favorite is a 12-month rent-to-own ZT Systems 2XL5520 16GB 2x2TB SATA for $40/month (got lucky with the 'off-brand', haven't seen a RTO 2xL5520 for under $50/mo since -- at least for monthly contracts).  wholesaleinternet.com has some ancient 2-core intel CPUs @ $10/mo sometimes (I got an Intel Core 2 6300 @ 1.86GHz, with a 250GB HDD with 46000 hours on it, LOL. $20 @ Dacentec is much better, if you can grab one). joesdatacenter.com (same location as Wholesale Internet) also occasionally has specials (or if you don't want to wait, it has an AMD Opteron 170 @ $16/mo).
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


/dev/null


View Profile
January 20, 2013, 02:36:01 AM
 #4444

p2pool's main problem is being penalized for including transactions.

P2pool miners are protecting the network against >50% attacks. That is a HUGE benefit for the bitcoin network.
Although the concept sounds good, since p2pool is only around 300-400GH/s - it really isn't protecting anything

... and if p2pool miners do as you suggest below, the larger pools, that include more transactions, are indeed better for BTC ...

Quote
Most p2pool users don't have the powerful servers and gigabit internet connections, so they should not include every possible 0-fee or 0.0005 BTC/kB transaction. It's not a huge problem if we leave that to the centralized pools.
And I thought forrest made it so that the transactions are really quickly between peers anyways, so are miners really still being penalized?
i'd think that it would be moved in a way that wouldnt involve that much more data, but you can see a clear difference in orphans when you set your blocksize to 1000 vs 250000.    though i'd go for something like 5000 so it can cherry pick the occasional huge fees.

anyway, re: memory leak, check this bad boy out:

http://5.9.157.150:9332/static/graphs.html?Month

maybe it has something to do with DOA shares?
is your node public? interested in stats.

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
January 20, 2013, 03:34:05 AM
 #4445

p2pool's main problem is being penalized for including transactions.

P2pool miners are protecting the network against >50% attacks. That is a HUGE benefit for the bitcoin network.
Although the concept sounds good, since p2pool is only around 300-400GH/s - it really isn't protecting anything

... and if p2pool miners do as you suggest below, the larger pools, that include more transactions, are indeed better for BTC ...

Quote
Most p2pool users don't have the powerful servers and gigabit internet connections, so they should not include every possible 0-fee or 0.0005 BTC/kB transaction. It's not a huge problem if we leave that to the centralized pools.
And I thought forrest made it so that the transactions are really quickly between peers anyways, so are miners really still being penalized?
i'd think that it would be moved in a way that wouldnt involve that much more data, but you can see a clear difference in orphans when you set your blocksize to 1000 vs 250000.    though i'd go for something like 5000 so it can cherry pick the occasional huge fees.

anyway, re: memory leak, check this bad boy out:

http://5.9.157.150:9332/static/graphs.html?Month

maybe it has something to do with DOA shares?
is your node public? interested in stats.

i put it back up about 4-5 hours ago, not mining on it again yet, though.. just for a relay...  it's @ http://nogleg.com:9332

Dacentec, best deals for US dedicated servers. They regularly restock $20-$25 Opterons with 8-16GB RAM & 2x1-2TB HDD's (ofc, usually lots of other good stuff to choose from).  I did a Serverbear benchmark of one of my $20/mo Opteron (June last year), it's here.  Have had about a half dozen different servers with Dacentec, & none have failed to sustain at least 40MB/s (burst higher). My favorite is a 12-month rent-to-own ZT Systems 2XL5520 16GB 2x2TB SATA for $40/month (got lucky with the 'off-brand', haven't seen a RTO 2xL5520 for under $50/mo since -- at least for monthly contracts).  wholesaleinternet.com has some ancient 2-core intel CPUs @ $10/mo sometimes (I got an Intel Core 2 6300 @ 1.86GHz, with a 250GB HDD with 46000 hours on it, LOL. $20 @ Dacentec is much better, if you can grab one). joesdatacenter.com (same location as Wholesale Internet) also occasionally has specials (or if you don't want to wait, it has an AMD Opteron 170 @ $16/mo).
Rogue Star
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 88


View Profile
January 22, 2013, 05:29:56 AM
 #4446

obviously, but what are the effects on p2pool as a whole? does it report orphaned shares correctly in this scenario, are there other effects?
% of orphan increases @ stats?! yes it does "report" them correctly. a side effect would be the wasted traffic, altough this isnt much.
well they certainly aren't reported on the local graphs, otherwise it would show a much higher waste rate in the mining graphs, so that's one of the reasons I ask. i suppose it makes sense since you can't fully verify a share until it's been included in the sharechain. the other reason I ask is the variance we see when there are problems with the nodes/sharechain seem to imply that the orphan/dead rate perhaps isn't reported correctly.

another question I had was if sharechain 11 is a hardfork, why does p2pool still connect to clients on sharechain 9 after the fork?

i've updated from Ubuntu Server x64 12.04 LTS to 12.10 and I'm still seeing the memory leak and increased orphaned/dead as i approach a day of node uptime. The leak appears to start after about 12 hour, although it's not as pronounced as on 12.04 LTS.

you can donate to me for whatever reason at: 18xbnjDDXxgcvRzv5k2vmrKQHWDjYsBDCf
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
January 22, 2013, 05:36:17 AM
 #4447

obviously, but what are the effects on p2pool as a whole? does it report orphaned shares correctly in this scenario, are there other effects?
% of orphan increases @ stats?! yes it does "report" them correctly. a side effect would be the wasted traffic, altough this isnt much.
well they certainly aren't reported on the local graphs, otherwise it would show a much higher waste rate in the mining graphs, so that's one of the reasons I ask. i suppose it makes sense since you can't fully verify a share until it's been included in the sharechain. the other reason I ask is the variance we see when there are problems with the nodes/sharechain seem to imply that the orphan/dead rate perhaps isn't reported correctly.

another question I had was if sharechain 11 is a hardfork, why does p2pool still connect to clients on sharechain 9 after the fork?

i've updated from Ubuntu Server x64 12.04 LTS to 12.10 and I'm still seeing the memory leak and increased orphaned/dead as i approach a day of node uptime. The leak appears to start after about 12 hour, although it's not as pronounced as on 12.04 LTS.

Versions 10 and 11 were not hardforks. They triggered the upgrade notifications, but there was no switchover to cut version 9's off.

I'm investigating the memory leak; one person experiencing it gave me SSH access and I'm waiting for it to occur. If anyone else wants to lend SSH access, that would be helpful too.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
January 22, 2013, 11:25:09 AM
 #4448

obviously, but what are the effects on p2pool as a whole? does it report orphaned shares correctly in this scenario, are there other effects?
% of orphan increases @ stats?! yes it does "report" them correctly. a side effect would be the wasted traffic, altough this isnt much.
well they certainly aren't reported on the local graphs, otherwise it would show a much higher waste rate in the mining graphs, so that's one of the reasons I ask. i suppose it makes sense since you can't fully verify a share until it's been included in the sharechain. the other reason I ask is the variance we see when there are problems with the nodes/sharechain seem to imply that the orphan/dead rate perhaps isn't reported correctly.

another question I had was if sharechain 11 is a hardfork, why does p2pool still connect to clients on sharechain 9 after the fork?

i've updated from Ubuntu Server x64 12.04 LTS to 12.10 and I'm still seeing the memory leak and increased orphaned/dead as i approach a day of node uptime. The leak appears to start after about 12 hour, although it's not as pronounced as on 12.04 LTS.

Versions 10 and 11 were not hardforks. They triggered the upgrade notifications, but there was no switchover to cut version 9's off.

I'm investigating the memory leak; one person experiencing it gave me SSH access and I'm waiting for it to occur. If anyone else wants to lend SSH access, that would be helpful too.

well, I know if you start p2pool with tons of old share files, it'll start you out at like 500MB+ memory usage.   it'll say something like 35000/35000 shares verified and it'll gradually start removing the old share files, but your memory usage will still stay at 500MB

Dacentec, best deals for US dedicated servers. They regularly restock $20-$25 Opterons with 8-16GB RAM & 2x1-2TB HDD's (ofc, usually lots of other good stuff to choose from).  I did a Serverbear benchmark of one of my $20/mo Opteron (June last year), it's here.  Have had about a half dozen different servers with Dacentec, & none have failed to sustain at least 40MB/s (burst higher). My favorite is a 12-month rent-to-own ZT Systems 2XL5520 16GB 2x2TB SATA for $40/month (got lucky with the 'off-brand', haven't seen a RTO 2xL5520 for under $50/mo since -- at least for monthly contracts).  wholesaleinternet.com has some ancient 2-core intel CPUs @ $10/mo sometimes (I got an Intel Core 2 6300 @ 1.86GHz, with a 250GB HDD with 46000 hours on it, LOL. $20 @ Dacentec is much better, if you can grab one). joesdatacenter.com (same location as Wholesale Internet) also occasionally has specials (or if you don't want to wait, it has an AMD Opteron 170 @ $16/mo).
spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1376

nec sine labore


View Profile
January 23, 2013, 01:08:52 PM
 #4449


I'm investigating the memory leak; one person experiencing it gave me SSH access and I'm waiting for it to occur. If anyone else wants to lend SSH access, that would be helpful too.

forrestv,

this is my public p2pool entry point at p2pool.soon.it:9332 after 10 days

Code:
Date Memory Usage/(B)
Wed Jan 23 2013 07:00:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 576M
Tue Jan 22 2013 14:12:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 578M
Mon Jan 21 2013 21:24:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 578M
Mon Jan 21 2013 04:36:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Sun Jan 20 2013 11:48:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Sat Jan 19 2013 19:00:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Sat Jan 19 2013 02:12:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Fri Jan 18 2013 09:24:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Thu Jan 17 2013 16:36:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Wed Jan 16 2013 23:48:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 570M
Wed Jan 16 2013 07:00:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 580M
Tue Jan 15 2013 14:12:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 518M
Mon Jan 14 2013 21:24:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 518M
Mon Jan 14 2013 04:36:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 511M
Sun Jan 13 2013 11:48:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 416M
Sat Jan 12 2013 19:00:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 335M
Sat Jan 12 2013 02:12:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 275M
Fri Jan 11 2013 09:24:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 276M
Thu Jan 10 2013 16:36:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 178M
Wed Jan 09 2013 23:48:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 0.00
Wed Jan 09 2013 07:00:00 GMT+0100 (ora solare Europa occidentale) 0.00

as you can see memory seems to have reached a maximum around 580 Mb.

I'm using python here but I've also used pypy in the past when I was experiencing high memory usage.

I'm going to restart it with pypy just to see if it makes any difference at all.

This is a fedora 16, 32 bit system with PAE and 6 GB of ram.

Regards.

spiccioli.

ps. memory usage does not work on freebsd (I've got a system running because I really like the zfs filesystem Smiley)
spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1376

nec sine labore


View Profile
January 23, 2013, 02:30:20 PM
 #4450


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli
stevegee58
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 783



View Profile
January 23, 2013, 02:57:54 PM
 #4451


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli

Beware of people who use phrases like "me thinks"  Cool

You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2013, 03:01:21 PM
 #4452


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli

Beware of people who use phrases like "me thinks"  Cool

Because they're pirates, right?

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
BitcoinOxygen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2013, 03:05:46 PM
 #4453


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli

Beware of people who use phrases like "me thinks"  Cool

Because they're pirates, right?

BTCOxygen PPS Mining Pool 2% Fee  <<<  Join Now
BitcoinOxygen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2013, 03:07:17 PM
 #4454

Quote

BTCOxygen PPS Mining Pool 2% Fee  <<<  Join Now
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
January 23, 2013, 03:33:35 PM
 #4455


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli

One does not even infer mentioning the L word. Even indirectly. Silence.
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2013, 03:36:06 PM
 #4456


I agree, my problems started with v10 also, and got worse with v11 - which also matches up with the beginning of the bad luck streak. It's just too coincidental me thinks........everything before v10 was grand.......but hey, I'm a noob, and I'm not kidding when I say I still have a lot to learn about this. But just look at that chart - something's wrong.

PatMan,

still so sure something is wrong? Wink

peace.

spiccioli

One does not even infer mentioning the L word. Even indirectly. Silence.

You mean "landlubber", right?

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
twmz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737



View Profile
January 23, 2013, 04:47:38 PM
 #4457

Anyone know what is wrong with the pool over the past day or so?  I don't see anything in the recent code changes, but the pool seems to be finding way more blocks that it is supposed to, so something is apparently wrong...

Was I helpful?  1TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs
WoT, GPG

Bitrated user: ewal.
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2013, 05:17:50 PM
 #4458

Anyone know what is wrong with the pool over the past day or so?  I don't see anything in the recent code changes, but the pool seems to be finding way more blocks that it is supposed to, so something is apparently wrong...
lol. "We are making to much money! Something is wrong guys!"

It's called luck.

forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
January 23, 2013, 05:19:59 PM
 #4459

Anyone know what is wrong with the pool over the past day or so?  I don't see anything in the recent code changes, but the pool seems to be finding way more blocks that it is supposed to, so something is apparently wrong...
lol. "We are making to much money! Something is wrong guys!"

It's called luck.

Whoooosh.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
stevegee58
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 783



View Profile
January 23, 2013, 05:32:47 PM
 #4460

One does not even imply mentioning the L word. Even indirectly. Silence.
FTFY

You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Pages: « 1 ... 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 [223] 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 ... 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!