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

[gyverlb]

still no bitcoin from the last time i mined(3 days ago)

If you stopped mining 3 days ago and you are speaking of your p2pool rewards I don't see how it can be news.

so those share are lost?

"Lost" has no meaning here. A share doesn't pay anything by itself, only blocks create coins. The payout logic which distributes these coins depends on the pool.

I don't understand why people mine on any pool without understanding how/when they will be paid. That's not as if it's difficult to find this information for P2Pool, the wiki page is linked in the OP (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool).

[Amph]

ok then my question is , are my coins stored when i turn off p2pool?so i can restart from that point?

[PatMan]

ok then my question is , are my coins stored when i turn off p2pool?so i can restart from that point?

You do not lose anything by turning off p2pool, if you switch it on again straight away you will see your current payout for shares already submitted. It does not keep them forever though, see above. You will still get paid for any blocks found even while p2pool is off as well.

[PatMan]

Seeing some high spikes in hash rate, possibly forrest testing.......??

[azw409]

I tried raising those two parameters in bitcoin.conf and it made absolutely no difference, in fact I had 10s latency from the outset whereas it usually takes several hours to get to 10s.

Nice to get two payouts today though after a weekend of famine.

[furball]

I tried raising those two parameters in bitcoin.conf and it made absolutely no difference, in fact I had 10s latency from the outset whereas it usually takes several hours to get to 10s.

What version of Bitcoin are you running? Are you running 0.8.2rc1? Those settings only seemed to work for me after upgrading to that version.

[Amph]

ok then my question is , are my coins stored when i turn off p2pool?so i can restart from that point?

You do not lose anything by turning off p2pool, if you switch it on again straight away you will see your current payout for shares already submitted. It does not keep them forever though, see above. You will still get paid for any blocks found even while p2pool is off as well.

ok but where are, my delayed transactions, now that i use the new version(8.2) with better latency?
i ask this because when i switched to this new version my payout disappeared...

i have forgotten the 24 hours thing... substantially, i lost  the payouts because i stopped p2pool for more than 24 hours.....

[Mogumodz]

Updated Bitcoin client to 0.8.2

Not changed anything in conf limiting tx sizes and blocks etc and it's still climbing, better but it's climbing.



I didn't have these issues in 11.3, I'm not really interested in changing tx values or block sizes so I'm personally just waiting it out, or mining LTC which doesn't seem to have the same high lat problem in p2pool.

*Edit* I also just got a valid share even with the slightly higher lat.

[Subo1977]

Has anyone running p2pool over Tor?

[Amph]

with 11.4 , 3.1.1 and 0.8.2

i'm getting 0.235s

my set
mintxfee=0.01
minrelaytxfee=0.005

much better than before(>2s with 0.8.1)

[fehknt]

FWIW, adding this to the bottom of my bitcoind.conf fixed the massive recent latency issues.  Now, I'm not sure if this is the best-for-the-network settings, but it certainly fixed my latency.   I increased the relay fee minimum some, and I think most importantly I doubled the time it takes for txns to become high priority.  Of course, that part is only a temporary fix...

EDIT: This only helped for a couple hours....

blockprioritysize=500000
mintxfee     =0.0002
minrelaytxfee=0.0002

[daemondazz]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

[GrapeApe]

I noticed that some nodes have fees. I was wondering how they set it up that way? I am not planning on adding a fee to my node I'm just curious.

[K1773R]

I noticed that some nodes have fees. I was wondering how they set it up that way? I am not planning on adding a fee to my node I'm just curious.

--fee lol, use --help

[kano]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

[TurdHurdur]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

Do you have a solution to the bitcoind latency problems that doesn't include taking issue with how people run their p2pool node?

[PatMan]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

Do you have a solution to the bitcoind latency problems that doesn't include taking issue with how people run their p2pool node?

I do. Fix p2pool software. Bitcoind works perfectly with every other pool, as is the norm. Can you imagine what would happen to Bitcoin if every miner from every pool started messing with the Bitcoin wallet configuration like most p2pool users do? It makes me laugh how p2pool users say that they are doing the most for Bitcoin when the opposite is true by messing with their wallets configuration files. The difference in actual earnings by doing so is marginal at most, while the damage to the Bitcoin network is far greater.

I use p2pool, but I will/have never changed the Bitcoin config - leave that to the devs. Fix that which is broken.

[zvs]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

Do you have a solution to the bitcoind latency problems that doesn't include taking issue with how people run their p2pool node?

I do. Fix p2pool software. Bitcoind works perfectly with every other pool, as is the norm. Can you imagine what would happen to Bitcoin if every miner from every pool started messing with the Bitcoin wallet configuration like most p2pool users do? It makes me laugh how p2pool users say that they are doing the most for Bitcoin when the opposite is true by messing with their wallets configuration files. The difference in actual earnings by doing so is marginal at most, while the damage to the Bitcoin network is far greater.

I use p2pool, but I will/have never changed the Bitcoin config - leave that to the devs. Fix that which is broken.

I guess the fees would go up, right? 

$ 0.012USD isn't worth it?  Bandwidth limits and such

[gyverlb]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

Do you have a solution to the bitcoind latency problems that doesn't include taking issue with how people run their p2pool node?

I do.

No you don't. If you can't motivate other miners to use your solution it isn't one.

Fix p2pool software. Bitcoind works perfectly with every other pool, as is the norm. Can you imagine what would happen to Bitcoin if every miner from every pool started messing with the Bitcoin wallet configuration like most p2pool users do?

How naive. What do you think pool operators do? Do you think p2pool miners are the first to tune bitcoind? There was a time when several big pools had to reject transactions because they suspected they put enough load on their node that it was generating orphans. There are actually guidelines from Gavin for the kind of filtering you argue against (use Google). Some pool operators actually patch bitcoind to filter some transactions they don't like (at least there was/is a patch for filtering out Satoshidice that was used by at least Eligius recently).

Anyway, I run a p2pool node and I changed its configuration not because of p2pool itself, I have other scripts using getblocktemplate or getmininginfo that can't afford to wait for several seconds on a regular basis. Patching p2pool even if it would make sense in your little world is of no use for me.

It makes me laugh how p2pool users say that they are doing the most for Bitcoin when the opposite is true by messing with their wallets configuration files. The difference in actual earnings by doing so is marginal at most, while the damage to the Bitcoin network is far greater.

I use p2pool, but I will/have never changed the Bitcoin config - leave that to the devs. Fix that which is broken.

What p2pool does is decentralizing mining power, it's good for the network and that's not what is discussed here. Including more than 1MB of transactions is not possible, some selection must be done and if transactions pile up like they did, some transactions must not be relayed or nodes will start to drop from out-of-memory conditions.

This already happened: Bitminter had stability problems recently due to the same transactions that bothered p2pool users, search the forums before posting nonsense.

What is happening is simply free market. If it's too costly for pool operators to include some transactions, they will not be mined and even not be relayed. This is expected. If a transaction is worth being mined/relayed it will eventually be. Arguing against that is a waste of time. And if bitcoind latencies issues become a problem for p2pool miners that they can't solve by tuning its configuration, maybe someone will patch bitcoind.

[PatMan]

Yeah right, looks like other pools are confirming these transactions:
http://blockchain.info/fr/unconfirmed-transactions

Currently that's 21MB worth of transactions which is at least 40 blocks with the default bitcoind settings (~500kB).

Down to slightly under 11MB, so it is coming down.

With thanks to the good pools that are committing them
Certainly not certain people in this thread ...

Do you have a solution to the bitcoind latency problems that doesn't include taking issue with how people run their p2pool node?

I do.

No you don't. If you can't motivate other miners to use your solution it isn't one.

Fix p2pool software. Bitcoind works perfectly with every other pool, as is the norm. Can you imagine what would happen to Bitcoin if every miner from every pool started messing with the Bitcoin wallet configuration like most p2pool users do?

How naive. What do you think pool operators do? Do you think p2pool miners are the first to tune bitcoind? There was a time when several big pools had to reject transactions because they suspected they put enough load on their node that it was generating orphans. There are actually guidelines from Gavin for the kind of filtering you argue against (use Google). Some pool operators actually patch bitcoind to filter some transactions they don't like (at least there was/is a patch for filtering out Satoshidice that was used by at least Eligius recently).

Anyway, I run a p2pool node and I changed its configuration not because of p2pool itself, I have other scripts using getblocktemplate or getmininginfo that can't afford to wait for several seconds on a regular basis. Patching p2pool even if it would make sense in your little world is of no use for me.

It makes me laugh how p2pool users say that they are doing the most for Bitcoin when the opposite is true by messing with their wallets configuration files. The difference in actual earnings by doing so is marginal at most, while the damage to the Bitcoin network is far greater.

I use p2pool, but I will/have never changed the Bitcoin config - leave that to the devs. Fix that which is broken.

What p2pool does is decentralizing mining power, it's good for the network and that's not what is discussed here. Including more than 1MB of transactions is not possible, some selection must be done and if transactions pile up like they did, some transactions must not be relayed or nodes will start to drop from out-of-memory conditions.

This already happened: Bitminter had stability problems recently due to the same transactions that bothered p2pool users, search the forums before posting nonsense.

What is happening is simply free market. If it's too costly for pool operators to include some transactions, they will not be mined and even not be relayed. This is expected. If a transaction is worth being mined/relayed it will eventually be. Arguing against that is a waste of time. And if bitcoind latencies issues become a problem for p2pool miners that they can't solve by tuning its configuration, maybe someone will patch bitcoind.

Naive?  My little world?  As that where we're at now - posting personal insults publicly?

Coming from the same person who has constantly denied that there is a problem with the stratum code implementation and still does, even though it's proven - that's quite rich, don't you think? It's a bit sad to dislike someone because they were right, but there's absolutely no excuse to resort to insulting them, weather they are correct or not.

Let's have some manners please......and some constructive criticism instead of childish remarks.

EDIT: And yes, I'm very aware of what pool ops do, thanks.