Bitcoin Forum
July 19, 2019, 12:45:54 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2580276 times)
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 29, 2013, 02:45:38 AM
 #5121

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.

Hey forrestv, do you want a Jalepeno? BFL_Josh will send you one if you'd like. You can find him here:
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2164-demo-unit-forrestv-p2pool.html
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563497154
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563497154

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563497154
Reply with quote  #2

1563497154
Report to moderator
TurdHurdur
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 217
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 29, 2013, 03:31:55 AM
 #5122

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.
Does a username like ckolivas/2000+10 help?
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
April 29, 2013, 03:46:12 AM
 #5123

Hey forrestv, do you want a Jalepeno? BFL_Josh will send you one if you'd like. You can find him here:
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2164-demo-unit-forrestv-p2pool.html

I contacted him. Thanks for the tip!

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
xhabit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 208
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 29, 2013, 04:47:20 AM
 #5124

wow, very nice from bfl ...  Smiley iLike

Bitcoin Priester German BTC PoolParty League
1Ey3GA55aqhLU3FCQ2aXbTAx8xw2LJsLVr
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2013, 06:01:45 AM
 #5125

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.

the same thing happens with GPUs while using cgminer (not a cgminer problem, but stratum I would think)

i think i commented on that some months ago

minerd picks up the new work much quicker, and it is better to use phoenix for p2pool, or not use stratum

zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2013, 06:04:19 AM
 #5126

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.
Does a username like ckolivas/2000+10 help?

no, because you'd still get the 6 new works every minute

the ratio of rejects to accepts would be the same

though, it would be nice if everyone over 5ghash or so did 2000 shares,  so people at lower rates may actually get something at some point

-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1180


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2013, 06:50:25 AM
 #5127

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.

the same thing happens with GPUs while using cgminer (not a cgminer problem, but stratum I would think)

i think i commented on that some months ago

minerd picks up the new work much quicker, and it is better to use phoenix for p2pool, or not use stratum
Yes using getwork with the jalapeño is actually better than using stratum, which is counter-intuitive and adds weight to the argument that there is a problem with p2pool's stratum implementation. Having said that, if forrestv can get one as a donation from BFL, that will benefit everyone because I'm sure there will be incentive on his part to investigate and develop further. Many people have approached me about rewriting p2pool from scratch in c, and as much fun as that sounds, I seriously don't have the time to support another project of this magnitude and would rather see the original author continue it.

Developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org, 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 29, 2013, 09:27:14 AM
 #5128

So I tried the current version of p2pool on a single 5.7GHz Jalapeño with cgminer connecting via stratum. This works out to about 80 diff1 shares per minute. It "works" in a sense of the word, without causing any weird errors or duplicating work that happen with the Avalon but there are huge lags between share submission and responses from p2pool after a while. Watching the CPU usage, I see a spike to 100% of one core whenever a block of transactions comes in and that coincides with the lag to respond to share submission, leading to more stale rejects if that occurs at the wrong time. The CPU in question is a 12 thread 3.4GHz CPU so it is clearly not underpowered. I suspect what happens on the Avalon is simply a grossly exaggerated form of this leading to misbehaviour.

the same thing happens with GPUs while using cgminer (not a cgminer problem, but stratum I would think)

i think i commented on that some months ago

minerd picks up the new work much quicker, and it is better to use phoenix for p2pool, or not use stratum
Yes using getwork with the jalapeño is actually better than using stratum, which is counter-intuitive and adds weight to the argument that there is a problem with p2pool's stratum implementation. Having said that, if forrestv can get one as a donation from BFL, that will benefit everyone because I'm sure there will be incentive on his part to investigate and develop further. Many people have approached me about rewriting p2pool from scratch in c, and as much fun as that sounds, I seriously don't have the time to support another project of this magnitude and would rather see the original author continue it.

You know, funny you should say that.  I was considering doing the same thing ... rewriting in C.  It would be quite a project indeed.

M

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

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
April 29, 2013, 07:38:46 PM
 #5129

P2Pool release 11.4 commit hash: 0cb07df5623645bc1082f87d3380f6d085a609be

Windows binary: http://u.forre.st/u/jlowtmzq/p2pool_win32_11.4.zip
Windows binary signature: http://u.forre.st/u/flasczol/p2pool_win32_11.4.zip.sig
Source zipball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/zipball/11.4
Source tarball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/tarball/11.4

Changes:
* Fixed a few more potential memory leaks
* Memory usage graph now works in Windows, thanks to David Kassa

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 29, 2013, 07:46:44 PM
 #5130

forrestv: you may want to update the subject of the thread, the pool seems to stabilize at more than 650GH/s now.

P2pool tuning guide
Trade BTC for €/$ at bitcoin.de (referral), it's cheaper and faster (acts as escrow and lets the buyers do bank transfers).
Tip: 17bdPfKXXvr7zETKRkPG14dEjfgBt5k2dd
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
April 29, 2013, 07:49:59 PM
 #5131

forrestv: you may want to update the subject of the thread, the pool seems to stabilize at more than 650GH/s now.
Good point. Used 700GH/s, as it is now Smiley

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 12:49:35 AM
 #5132

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 12:54:12 AM
 #5133

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

Mine's been acting funny the last 24 hours too.  I should be between .25 and .30 per block, been below .20 the last 5.

M

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

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 12:55:12 AM
 #5134

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

What do you mean by "p2pool stopped"?

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
evilpete
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 77
Merit: 10



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 01:11:48 AM
 #5135

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

Is this you by any chance?

2013-04-29 16:39:08.307039 Incoming connection to peer 74.100.64.248:56708 established. p2pool version: 1100 '11.2'
2013-04-29 16:39:08.472251 Sending 1 shares to 74.100.64.248:56708
2013-04-29 16:39:08.474522 Lost peer 74.100.64.248:56708 - Connection was closed cleanly.
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475089 > in handle_share_hashes:
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475163 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475245 > Failure: twisted.internet.error.ConnectionDone: Connection was closed cleanly.

That particular peer is having a lot of trouble:

$ grep 'Lost peer' log | awk '{print $5}' | sed -e 's/:.*//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr
 168 74.100.64.248
   5 123.159.6.63
   2 216.153.20.29
.. nothing else more than one..

The #2 on the list is doing things like this:

2013-04-29 08:50:54.110763 Connection timed out, disconnecting from 123.159.6.63:54137
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111417 Lost peer 123.159.6.63:54137 -
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111508     Connection was aborted locally, using
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111569     L{twisted.internet.interfaces.ITCPTransport.abortConnection}.

Are either of those two yours?

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
- Mahatma Gandhi
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:07:29 AM
 #5136

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

Is this you by any chance?

2013-04-29 16:39:08.307039 Incoming connection to peer 74.100.64.248:56708 established. p2pool version: 1100 '11.2'
2013-04-29 16:39:08.472251 Sending 1 shares to 74.100.64.248:56708
2013-04-29 16:39:08.474522 Lost peer 74.100.64.248:56708 - Connection was closed cleanly.
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475089 > in handle_share_hashes:
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475163 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2013-04-29 16:39:08.475245 > Failure: twisted.internet.error.ConnectionDone: Connection was closed cleanly.

That particular peer is having a lot of trouble:

$ grep 'Lost peer' log | awk '{print $5}' | sed -e 's/:.*//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr
 168 74.100.64.248
   5 123.159.6.63
   2 216.153.20.29
.. nothing else more than one..

The #2 on the list is doing things like this:

2013-04-29 08:50:54.110763 Connection timed out, disconnecting from 123.159.6.63:54137
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111417 Lost peer 123.159.6.63:54137 -
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111508     Connection was aborted locally, using
2013-04-29 08:50:54.111569     L{twisted.internet.interfaces.ITCPTransport.abortConnection}.

Are either of those two yours?


No. But see PM.

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:11:48 AM
 #5137

Some kind of DOS attack?

Got three "GOT INCOMPLETE BLOCK FROM PEER" messages and then p2pool stopped. Peer IP is 192.203.228.65

Now just got another one.

What do you mean by "p2pool stopped"?

Miner got disconnected, p2pool not doing anything apparently though since a fourth message came up, it looks like it was not completely dead. I did a simple restart of the process and things seem fine so far. I guess I waited about 5 minutes before restarting it (did not have to reboot).

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
Mogumodz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 290
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:45:30 AM
 #5138

Anyone see any problem running and updating 11.4 along side my working 11.3 node while it verifies all the shares?

I seem to recall this being asked a few pages back but can't seem to find it so might have dreamt it.

The output says it can't bind to the p2p port or worker port so my current mining, website stats, graphs etc are unaffected but it's verifying shares so thought could this work?



Just wanted to know If this is ok before I assume anything.

Bitcoin OTC rating GPG ID: 3E7974A1 P2Pool statistics: p2pool.info
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1045


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 02:49:06 AM
 #5139

Yes that's exactly the procedure in the readme if I remember correctly.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Mogumodz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 290
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:49:20 AM
 #5140

Yes that's exactly the procedure in the readme if I remember correctly.

Thanks

Bitcoin OTC rating GPG ID: 3E7974A1 P2Pool statistics: p2pool.info
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 ... 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!