Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 11:37:40 PM *
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 ... 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 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2034034 times)
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 953



View Profile
May 27, 2013, 09:26:36 AM
 #5561

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
1481326660
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326660

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326660
Reply with quote  #2

1481326660
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481326660
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326660

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326660
Reply with quote  #2

1481326660
Report to moderator
1481326660
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326660

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326660
Reply with quote  #2

1481326660
Report to moderator
1481326660
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326660

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326660
Reply with quote  #2

1481326660
Report to moderator
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 27, 2013, 09:29:55 AM
 #5562

Good guide even though I'm completely opposite with transactions. Anyway why does Bitcoin limit connections on the rpc side? That seems like a bug.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  OpenVPN 2GB Free  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 27, 2013, 09:31:32 AM
 #5563

Does the be blade use its own mining software and not cgminer etc?

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  OpenVPN 2GB Free  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 27, 2013, 09:32:42 AM
 #5564

http://p2pool.info

is three a list of found Block per P2pool-Node?

I think it's one thing of including the maximum TX Fees in a Block , but how great is the chance of finding a Block on my node and earn the Fee's?

in my situation it's make's a differenz of 20 % income with / Without Fees, but i havnt found a Block in the last. So its better for me to not include the Fees's and increase my Efficiency.





Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  OpenVPN 2GB Free  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
Subo1977
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 345


View Profile
May 27, 2013, 09:41:53 AM
 #5565

http://p2pool.info

is three a list of found Block per P2pool-Node?

I think it's one thing of including the maximum TX Fees in a Block , but how great is the chance of finding a Block on my node and earn the Fee's?

in my situation it's make's a differenz of 20 % income with / Without Fees, but i havnt found a Block in the last. So its better for me to not include the Fees's and increase my Efficiency.





I know this site,
i mean a list of found Block per NODE

I provide a 1000Mbit+ Torrent-Seedbox in FR and a 500Mbit Box in NL for orginal Blockchain Bootstrap.dat download. and also for Armoryclient Torrent

Tips are welcome:  15MuGdPSXU62fEFE9XbBZN3UvJMHBDVBoy
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
May 27, 2013, 10:43:27 AM
 #5566

http://p2pool.info

is three a list of found Block per P2pool-Node?

I think it's one thing of including the maximum TX Fees in a Block , but how great is the chance of finding a Block on my node and earn the Fee's?

in my situation it's make's a differenz of 20 % income with / Without Fees, but i havnt found a Block in the last. So its better for me to not include the Fees's and increase my Efficiency.





I know this site,
i mean a list of found Block per NODE
besides just grepping BLOCK on the log file?  probably not..  i've found 3 in the last 2 months or so, but that's incredibly lucky.   just look at what the normal odds would be and calculate it that way, i guess.  for 10ghash, the average time to find a block would be about 2 months exactly.  so the chances of finding one before next difficulty change is, what, 25%?   so, if some 500kb block size increases the # of orphans and DOA you get by even .5% or something, it's a bad deal.  i still think the best thing to do here would be to give fees to block solver, but w/e

raising blocksize to something like 20,000 or 30,000 and also raising the minimum fee, i think you could argue that might be more efficient for both

ed:  i've run p2pool on a virtual ubuntu server on my home connection.  i have an i7 980 and 24GB RAM, so I keep entire blockchain in RAM, etc.  but I have to limit upstream to 50KB/s, because home connection is only 1Mbit upstream (or so they claim, it's more like 768Kbps)...  anything more and it starts to cause some jitter, anything past 70KB/s and I start getting packetloss.   so a 500KB block would take some 10 seconds to send out to 1 peer.  this also increases the chance of it being orphaned from bitcoin network itself, not just p2pool

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).
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
May 27, 2013, 12:22:56 PM
 #5567

  so, if some 500kb block size increases the # of orphans and DOA you get by even .5% or something, it's a bad deal.  i still think the best thing to do here would be to give fees to block solver, but w/e

raising blocksize to something like 20,000 or 30,000 and also raising the minimum fee, i think you could argue that might be more efficient for both

Please stop propagating deprecated numbers: these aren't valid anymore, I spent several days testing this and reporting results, the guide in my signature is updated with up to date information.
For example I use a maxblocksize of 1,000,000 and lower fee limits than the defaults and my node is currently at 111,7% efficiency (the number oscillates between 110 and 115) with a getblocktemplate latency averaging 0.26s for the last 24h.

ed:  i've run p2pool on a virtual ubuntu server on my home connection.  i have an i7 980 and 24GB RAM, so I keep entire blockchain in RAM, etc.  but I have to limit upstream to 50KB/s, because home connection is only 1Mbit upstream (or so they claim, it's more like 768Kbps)...  anything more and it starts to cause some jitter, anything past 70KB/s and I start getting packetloss.   so a 500KB block would take some 10 seconds to send out to 1 peer.  this also increases the chance of it being orphaned from bitcoin network itself, not just p2pool

My upstream is the same. But I limited the number of connections of both bitcoind and P2Pool to avoid them filling the pipe. I use maxconnections=10 for bitcoind and --max-conns 3 --outgoing-conns 3 for P2Pool. With your processor speed, with the same settings than my own configuration you should expect a better efficiency than mine (probably >115% unless all miners start updating according to my guide in the meantime: this should lower all efficiencies above 100%). Just read the guide and report if your results don't match mine.

Blocks found by a P2Pool node are broadcasted by every P2Pool nodes and IIRC as the transactions are already known, like P2Pool shares the whole block doesn't need to be transmitted between P2Pool nodes.
If it weren't the case we would have more orphans than other pools.

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


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 12:44:30 AM
 #5568

I don't know the exact reason why getblocktemplate affected efficiency and even if it's still the case today as forrestv might have changed something that removes this problem. It was still the case very recently (like less than 2 months ago) when getblocktemplate took more than 0.2s. I don't check often how it affects p2pool but I'm doing it right now (in fact I'm studying how the block size and fee limits affect getblocktemplate in the current situation, checking the efficiency is just a bonus). If the behavior of p2pool changed I'll know it in the following days and will be able to update my guide. For now I still recommend to keep it under 0.2s to be safe.

Some recent findings on P2Pool efficiency on my node.

My node is directly connected to the Internet with Ethernet, 100 Mbit/s downstream and 10 Mbit/s upstream. The node is a Phenom four-core processor, with SSD disk. I have 7 mining rigs connected to the node via LAN.

All numbers below are with current (April 2013) P2Pool from Github.

When my configuration was incorrect and Bitcoind could only make outgoing connections, my efficiency was between 95% and 99%.

After fixing the configuration problem, efficiency rose to 110-115% level. I have now 30-40 connections to the Bitcoin network.

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

I have now upgraded to the 0.8.2rc3 version, and the getblocktemplate latency decreased to about 0.1 seconds, but it has increased to 0.9 seconds since the upgrade (in four hours).

Current efficiency after two hours from the upgrade is 102.4%. Well, I think one cannot deduce anything from that yet, maybe the stopping and restarting of bitcoind caused some orphans.

I'll report the efficiency back to this thread after 24 hours have passed with this new bitcoind version.
Bitmong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 12:49:14 AM
 #5569

One more thing I noticed.. After the bitcoind upgrade, my DOA has doubled from ~ 4% to 8%.

EDIT: After closer inspection of the log file, I see that the DOA has varied between ~0% to 8% anyway before this.
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:18:40 AM
 #5570

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
davidkassa
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:33:41 AM
 #5571

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
****
Online Online

Activity: 294



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:39:49 AM
 #5572

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



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 01:43:02 AM
 #5573

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


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:07:40 AM
 #5574

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


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:21:11 AM
 #5575

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



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:22:06 AM
 #5576

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



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 02:29:34 AM
 #5577

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


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 03:09:00 AM
 #5578

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


View Profile
May 29, 2013, 06:43:26 AM
 #5579

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

Activity: 294



View Profile
May 29, 2013, 06:46:22 AM
 #5580

need continue update...

Of?

Computers, Amateur Radio, Electronics, Aviation - 1dazzrAbMqNu6cUwh2dtYckNygG7jKs8S
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 ... 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!