Bitcoin Forum
July 16, 2019, 07:15:57 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2580042 times)
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:18:40 AM
 #5561

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

This is the worst latency I've seen reported so far (by nearly 3x, the worst I can rember was ~12s). With <0.8.2rc3 getblocktemplate depends heavily on you CPU speed and number of transactions in your memory pool. As you seem to have an adequate CPU, it probably doesn't explain the difference. Do you use non-default values in your bitcoin.conf?

You have relatively high bandwidth, but what is your link latency? If you use traceroute/mtr or similar tools, what is the time-to-hop for your ISP main routers and addresses in North America/Europe/China (where most nodes and probably miners are according to http://blockchain.info/fr/nodes-globe).

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
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563261357
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563261357

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563261357
Reply with quote  #2

1563261357
Report to moderator
1563261357
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563261357

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563261357
Reply with quote  #2

1563261357
Report to moderator
1563261357
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563261357

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563261357
Reply with quote  #2

1563261357
Report to moderator
davidkassa
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:33:41 AM
 #5562

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

This is the worst latency I've seen reported so far

My getblocktemplate latency hit about 30 seconds until I upgraded to the 0.8.2rc3.

Now I'm not sure if it's "bad luck" or something else but since I upgraded my latency is ~0.4 but my efficiency has been sitting in the low 80%s. I'm not quite sure how to debug this. My local DOA is ~2.5% but my orphans have been awful. I have both 8333 and 9333 traffic QOS'd. I guess I'm going to look closer at my network.
daemondazz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:39:49 AM
 #5563

Hwoever has started mining on cryptominer.org in the last little while, please check your username as it appears you've got an extra 'M' at the start:

Code:
darryl@server1:~$ bitcoind validateaddress M13iETYjuQ1Dnhz4vRPBRHJj6mztu4i86Fs
{
    "isvalid" : false
}
darryl@server1:~$ bitcoind validateaddress 13iETYjuQ1Dnhz4vRPBRHJj6mztu4i86Fs
{
    "isvalid" : true,
    "address" : "13iETYjuQ1Dnhz4vRPBRHJj6mztu4i86Fs",
    "ismine" : false
}

Unless of course you're donating your hashrate to me Smiley

Computers, Amateur Radio, Electronics, Aviation - 1dazzrAbMqNu6cUwh2dtYckNygG7jKs8S
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:43:02 AM
 #5564

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

This is the worst latency I've seen reported so far

My getblocktemplate latency hit about 30 seconds until I upgraded to the 0.8.2rc3.

Now I'm not sure if it's "bad luck" or something else but since I upgraded my latency is ~0.4 but my efficiency has been sitting in the low 80%s. I'm not quite sure how to debug this. My local DOA is ~2.5% but my orphans have been awful. I have both 8333 and 9333 traffic QOS'd. I guess I'm going to look closer at my network.

Check my guide if you see some low hanging fruits.

I just noticed that my own efficiency started to get down the last 24h (the first 24h with my settings where between 110 and 115% and now I'm at ~105%).
This may be because most P2Pool nodes are upgrading bitcoind and lowering their own getblocktemplate latency in the process. I'll have to test again to see if lowering my getblocktemplate latency helps my efficiency.
My current 0.25s might not be low enough now. One possibility is that this value actually influences efficiency when there's a noticeable difference between its value on a node and the average on all P2Pool nodes. Back to testing different bitcoin.conf values. Too bad: in its current configuration my node was including enough fees to make a 26.5BTC block! Fortunately with 0.8.2 I won't have to make much sacrifices in fees to reach very low latencies.

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
Bitmong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:07:40 AM
 #5565

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

This is the worst latency I've seen reported so far (by nearly 3x, the worst I can rember was ~12s). With <0.8.2rc3 getblocktemplate depends heavily on you CPU speed and number of transactions in your memory pool. As you seem to have an adequate CPU, it probably doesn't explain the difference. Do you use non-default values in your bitcoin.conf?

I didn't change any block size / tx fee settings in bitcoin.conf, only rpc settings and server settings.

Actually the latency was around 30 seconds when I used the bitcoind on that computer or when I set P2Pool to use the bitcoin-qt on my Windows computer with Core i7-3820 processor. So, the latency was definitely not caused by the CPU.

Quote from: gyverlb
You have relatively high bandwidth, but what is your link latency? If you use traceroute/mtr or similar tools, what is the time-to-hop for your ISP main routers and addresses in North America/Europe/China (where most nodes and probably miners are according to http://blockchain.info/fr/nodes-globe).

I live in Finland btw.

MTR shows these results for some nodes:

First ISP router 2ms
Last ISP router 4ms
US (Sayreville) 111ms
Japan 294ms
Australia 430ms
Hong Kong 340ms
Netherlands 33ms
China 330ms
Switzerland 44ms
Ukraine 57ms
Bitmong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:21:11 AM
 #5566

I just noticed that my own efficiency started to get down the last 24h (the first 24h with my settings where between 110 and 115% and now I'm at ~105%).
This may be because most P2Pool nodes are upgrading bitcoind and lowering their own getblocktemplate latency in the process. I'll have to test again to see if lowering my getblocktemplate latency helps my efficiency.
My current 0.25s might not be low enough now. One possibility is that this value actually influences efficiency when there's a noticeable difference between its value on a node and the average on all P2Pool nodes. Back to testing different bitcoin.conf values. Too bad: in its current configuration my node was including enough fees to make a 26.5BTC block! Fortunately with 0.8.2 I won't have to make much sacrifices in fees to reach very low latencies.

When I browsed through my P2Pool log, I noticed that the P2Pool stale rate varied between 17% and 20%+ in the last couple of days. Therefore the efficiency figure fluctuates even if your own stale / DOA rate doesn't change at all. That is why I think one should watch one's own stale rate more than the efficiency figure.

One problem with reaching conclusions on the data is that one needs quite a high hashrate in order to get a narrow confidence interval on the stale rate in a timeframe of a day or so.

For example, my mining rate is about 4.5 GH/s, and the stale rate interval reported by P2Pool is -+5% of the real stale rate after mining with the pool for three days or so.
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:22:06 AM
 #5567

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

This is the worst latency I've seen reported so far (by nearly 3x, the worst I can rember was ~12s). With <0.8.2rc3 getblocktemplate depends heavily on you CPU speed and number of transactions in your memory pool. As you seem to have an adequate CPU, it probably doesn't explain the difference. Do you use non-default values in your bitcoin.conf?

I didn't change any block size / tx fee settings in bitcoin.conf, only rpc settings and server settings.

Actually the latency was around 30 seconds when I used the bitcoind on that computer or when I set P2Pool to use the bitcoin-qt on my Windows computer with Core i7-3820 processor. So, the latency was definitely not caused by the CPU.


Maybe I just upgraded soon enough to not see these kinds of latencies (it was just below 10s at the worst).

Quote from: gyverlb
You have relatively high bandwidth, but what is your link latency? If you use traceroute/mtr or similar tools, what is the time-to-hop for your ISP main routers and addresses in North America/Europe/China (where most nodes and probably miners are according to http://blockchain.info/fr/nodes-globe).

I live in Finland btw.

MTR shows these results for some nodes:

First ISP router 2ms
Last ISP router 4ms
US (Sayreville) 111ms
Japan 294ms
Australia 430ms
Hong Kong 340ms
Netherlands 33ms
China 330ms
Switzerland 44ms
Ukraine 57ms

These looks good, I have better European and China results (most of the time <30ms in Europe and ~220ms with China) but I'm puzzled (I don't think it can explain our differences in efficiency).

Did you restart your p2pool node recently and let it run 24h to have a more accurate stat (efficiency isn't accurate with long runs : it compares your own rates of DOA/orphans since the p2pool process start with the average over 24h of the network).

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
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:29:34 AM
 #5568

When I browsed through my P2Pool log, I noticed that the P2Pool stale rate varied between 17% and 20%+ in the last couple of days. Therefore the efficiency figure fluctuates even if your own stale / DOA rate doesn't change at all. That is why I think one should watch one's own stale rate more than the efficiency figure.

Both are interesting: your own stale rate varying shows that something changed on your node and help you pinpoint local problems. But you don't want your efficiency to fall too much. Depending on your use of merged-mining (Namecoin essentially), if you fall below the 90-95% range, a centralized pool begins to makes sense if you can't lower your stale rate and wants to maximize your income.

Quote
One problem with reaching conclusions on the data is that one needs quite a high hashrate in order to get a narrow confidence interval on the stale rate in a timeframe of a day or so.

For example, my mining rate is about 4.5 GH/s, and the stale rate interval reported by P2Pool is -+5% of the real stale rate after mining with the pool for three days or so.

Yep, mining with less than 10GH/s makes things difficult. I'm at ~9GH/s and I don't fully trust my stats. I often double-check configuration changes when differences are low enough to be explained by variance in my share/stale rate.

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
Bitmong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 03:09:00 AM
 #5569

When I browsed through my P2Pool log, I noticed that the P2Pool stale rate varied between 17% and 20%+ in the last couple of days. Therefore the efficiency figure fluctuates even if your own stale / DOA rate doesn't change at all. That is why I think one should watch one's own stale rate more than the efficiency figure.

Both are interesting: your own stale rate varying shows that something changed on your node and help you pinpoint local problems. But you don't want your efficiency to fall too much. Depending on your use of merged-mining (Namecoin essentially), if you fall below the 90-95% range, a centralized pool begins to makes sense if you can't lower your stale rate and wants to maximize your income.

Well, I am merge-mining Namecoin, Devcoin and Ixcoin, so there is some extra there.

And actually my efficiency is over 100% now that the incoming bitcoind connection issue was solved. Now I'm only interested to see how the 0.8.2rc3 update and increased maxblocksize affected the efficiency. We shall see about that this week.
walf_man
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 06:43:26 AM
 #5570

need continue update...
daemondazz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 06:46:22 AM
 #5571

need continue update...

Of?

Computers, Amateur Radio, Electronics, Aviation - 1dazzrAbMqNu6cUwh2dtYckNygG7jKs8S
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000


House Nogleg


View Profile WWW
May 29, 2013, 08:47:32 AM
 #5572

if you eliminated the DOA's from the ASIC miner that has my pool as a backup, i have 501 shares, 12 orphans, and ~25-30 DOA (ed: more like 460-470 shares, 10-11 orphans, and ~25-30 DOA.  forgot to include the good ones too)

mining on my home connection nets me 0-1% DOA but 10%+ orphans.  i think it's due to 1) not being able to open that many connections (bandwidth), and 2) most of the hashing power being in europe and asia

anyway, for someone out there looking for a pool to mine at, the lowest latency one isnt necessarily the best.   i spent several days on my florida server (75ms latency) and ended up gonig back to germany, because the florida server's orphans >>> DOA on other server, even though it also had 50+ connections open.  like i said, i think that's probably due to all the nodes in europe, russia, china, etc

i imagine the default outgoing limit was set to such a small number w/ ppl like myself in mind (crap upstream from home connection), but with 10Mbit connection you should at least up that to 15 or so.   it looks like my average outgoing is around 200 KB/s with 70 connections, though on occasion it'll go > 500KB/s

i'm not that fond of incoming connections (due to all the messed up nodes that'll connect and disconnect + the nodes with 1000+ms latency), but if nobody accepted any incoming, then, well....   i set mine to 10 as a compromise.. it defaults to 40.   the --p2pool-node you put as additions don't count as outgoing connections towards your limit.    (i have 5 outgoing, 10 incoming, the rest are all from --p2pool-node)

furball
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 172
Merit: 100



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 10:39:24 AM
 #5573

Just to recap, is this now the recommended settings:

Code:
blockmaxsize=1000000
blockminsize=400000
mintxfee=0.00001
minrelaytxfee=0.00001

And that's for bitcoin.conf right? And solo miners should/nt use this too?

I'm guessing this only works if my node finds the block so I hope if this is good, most people add this because it effects me.

That's for bitcoin.conf, yes.

blockminsize is a personnal choice (I left it out in the guide).
This works if your node finds a block, the minrelaytxfee might have a direct impact as it helps propagate fees that could be paid to you when someone else finds a block.

I've been testing some scenarios as well and found that for me, the txfees are very influential on the latency. I wanted to change to a bigger block size to hopefully make more on the pool but I found after that I had to tune the txfees to keep the latency low.

This is what I've settled on; this gives me circa 0.2s latency with an acceptable efficiency; maybe it will work for other people too.

blockprioritysize=27000
blockmaxsize=1000000
mintxfee=0.00007
minrelaytxfee=0.00007
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 11:29:42 AM
 #5574

I've been testing some scenarios as well and found that for me, the txfees are very influential on the latency. I wanted to change to a bigger block size to hopefully make more on the pool but I found after that I had to tune the txfees to keep the latency low.

This is what I've settled on; this gives me circa 0.2s latency with an acceptable efficiency; maybe it will work for other people too.

blockprioritysize=27000
blockmaxsize=1000000
mintxfee=0.00007
minrelaytxfee=0.00007

You are right: if there are enough tx to fill a block raising the minimum txfees avoids maintaining some that can't fit in the block in the memory pool which lowers your latency.

I raised mined from 0.00001 to 0.00002 and although my latency went from 0.25s to ~0.1s my efficiency wasn't raised noticeably (still ~105%). I believe that more and more P2Pool nodes are being setup correctly which makes everybody's efficiency converge towards 100% (which is fair and good).

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
ok
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 12:24:12 PM
 #5575

Thanks, but this still doesnt' help us. How to merge stratum-forrestv with stratum-mining-proxy?

stratum-mining-proxy uses the stratum package, which is somewhere on your computer if you're running stratum-mining-proxy, and is what the patch needs to be applied to.

Thank you! It works.
Now I successfully installed new stratum package and proxy is working, just look:
Code:
$ python mining_proxy.py -gp 5001 -sp 5002 -o localhost -p 9332
2013-05-27 10:22:17,862 INFO proxy jobs.<module> # Using C extension for midstate speedup. Good!
2013-05-27 10:22:17,871 ERROR proxy mining_proxy.main # Stratum host/port autodetection failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "mining_proxy.py", line 178, in main
    new_host = (yield utils.detect_stratum(args.host, args.port))
  File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/Twisted-13.0.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1070, in _inlineCallbacks
    result = g.send(result)
  File "/home/pioruns/stratum-mining-proxy/mining_libs/utils.py", line 69, in detect_stratum
    header = f.response_headers.get('x-stratum', None)[0]
TypeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute '__getitem__'
2013-05-27 10:22:17,871 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # Stratum proxy version: 1.5.2
2013-05-27 10:22:17,873 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.test_update # Checking for updates...
2013-05-27 10:22:18,265 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # Trying to connect to Stratum pool at localhost:9332
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO stats stats.print_stats # 1 peers connected, state changed 1 times
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO proxy mining_proxy.on_connect # Connected to Stratum pool at localhost:9332
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO proxy mining_proxy.on_connect # Subscribing for mining jobs
2013-05-27 10:22:18,303 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # -----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # PROXY IS LISTENING ON ALL IPs ON PORT 5002 (stratum) AND 5001 (getwork)
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # -----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:18,306 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 8850090419252557308580900352527982298 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True
2013-05-27 10:22:29,931 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:29,933 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 82294000856594409674845997521737547736 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True
2013-05-27 10:22:41,372 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:41,374 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 285117993302263092594898950693479724933 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True

Why do you need a stratum proxy any way?
Tomorrow (hopefully today if time permits) I will be testing BE Blade on this proxy Smiley

Hi there lenny, please let me know if you were successful with setting up you BE Blade with the stratum proxy on p2pool. Thx
FlappySocks
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 08:12:16 PM
 #5576

Anyone tried p2pool with shedskin or pypy to lighten the resources it uses?
PrintMule
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 500


One of the world's leading Bitcoin-powered casinos


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 08:27:21 PM
 #5577

Is there a point of me trying out my 600mh/swhile having quite weak upload speeds?



Do not want to go through all the hassle for nothing.
What rates are expected?

stepkrav
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 188
Merit: 100



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 10:59:11 PM
 #5578

can i use a remote bitcoind instead of running it in the same machine with the miners?

Or could i have bitcoind and p2pool on remote machine and miners to a local one ?
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000


DARKNETMARKETS.COM


View Profile WWW
May 29, 2013, 11:06:02 PM
 #5579

Thanks, but this still doesnt' help us. How to merge stratum-forrestv with stratum-mining-proxy?

stratum-mining-proxy uses the stratum package, which is somewhere on your computer if you're running stratum-mining-proxy, and is what the patch needs to be applied to.

Thank you! It works.
Now I successfully installed new stratum package and proxy is working, just look:
Code:
$ python mining_proxy.py -gp 5001 -sp 5002 -o localhost -p 9332
2013-05-27 10:22:17,862 INFO proxy jobs.<module> # Using C extension for midstate speedup. Good!
2013-05-27 10:22:17,871 ERROR proxy mining_proxy.main # Stratum host/port autodetection failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "mining_proxy.py", line 178, in main
    new_host = (yield utils.detect_stratum(args.host, args.port))
  File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/Twisted-13.0.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1070, in _inlineCallbacks
    result = g.send(result)
  File "/home/pioruns/stratum-mining-proxy/mining_libs/utils.py", line 69, in detect_stratum
    header = f.response_headers.get('x-stratum', None)[0]
TypeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute '__getitem__'
2013-05-27 10:22:17,871 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # Stratum proxy version: 1.5.2
2013-05-27 10:22:17,873 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.test_update # Checking for updates...
2013-05-27 10:22:18,265 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # Trying to connect to Stratum pool at localhost:9332
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO stats stats.print_stats # 1 peers connected, state changed 1 times
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO proxy mining_proxy.on_connect # Connected to Stratum pool at localhost:9332
2013-05-27 10:22:18,268 INFO proxy mining_proxy.on_connect # Subscribing for mining jobs
2013-05-27 10:22:18,303 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # -----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # PROXY IS LISTENING ON ALL IPs ON PORT 5002 (stratum) AND 5001 (getwork)
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 WARNING proxy mining_proxy.main # -----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-05-27 10:22:18,304 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:18,306 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 8850090419252557308580900352527982298 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True
2013-05-27 10:22:29,931 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:29,933 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 82294000856594409674845997521737547736 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True
2013-05-27 10:22:41,372 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # Setting new difficulty: 0.999984741211
2013-05-27 10:22:41,374 INFO proxy client_service.handle_event # New job 285117993302263092594898950693479724933 for prevhash 385766c3, clean_jobs=True

Why do you need a stratum proxy any way?
Tomorrow (hopefully today if time permits) I will be testing BE Blade on this proxy Smiley

Hi there lenny, please let me know if you were successful with setting up you BE Blade with the stratum proxy on p2pool. Thx

Unfortunately, no success...
Blade just do not connect to stratum proxy on p2pool. There is not error message at all.
I would like really to have some developer in it, I can donate my Blade worktime to debug this.

DARKNET MARKETS >> https://DARKNETMARKETS.COM
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 11:18:19 PM
 #5580

Unfortunately, no success...
Blade just do not connect to stratum proxy on p2pool. There is not error message at all.
I would like really to have some developer in it, I can donate my Blade worktime to debug this.

You know, I've tried using the stratum proxy on p2pool with normal GPUs.  It just doesn't work.  I don't think this is a blade thing.

M

I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent!  Come join me!
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 ... 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!