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

[baloo_kiev]

EDIT: On BFL's forums, some users are reporting > 100% efficiency with 5.5 GH/s miners. I thought reports here were that they don't work?
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/jalapeno-single-sc-support/3367-reducing-20%25-hash-rate-penalty-using-bfl-hardware-p2pool.html#post42224

Hi I'm that user on forums.butterflylabs.com talking about my jalepeno which works fine on p2pool, my current efficiency is 105%.  I'm not sure why the p2pool guide claims ASICs can't work on p2pool, it's working fine for me.  Once I get my 60GH singles in I'll be trying them there too so we'll see if they hold up as well.

It's odd, that's for sure.  You have 105% efficiency, but you also have a 20% DOA rate (which is horribly bad).  Not sure which number to believe...

He should give it a little more time. At "three sigma" confidence interval his stale+dead rate is (18.6 +- 10.2)%, so it could be just good luck.

[notme]

EDIT: On BFL's forums, some users are reporting > 100% efficiency with 5.5 GH/s miners. I thought reports here were that they don't work?
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/jalapeno-single-sc-support/3367-reducing-20%25-hash-rate-penalty-using-bfl-hardware-p2pool.html#post42224

Hi I'm that user on forums.butterflylabs.com talking about my jalepeno which works fine on p2pool, my current efficiency is 105%.  I'm not sure why the p2pool guide claims ASICs can't work on p2pool, it's working fine for me.  Once I get my 60GH singles in I'll be trying them there too so we'll see if they hold up as well.

It's odd, that's for sure.  You have 105% efficiency, but you also have a 20% DOA rate (which is horribly bad).  Not sure which number to believe...

Isn't 20% DOA pretty average for p2pool?

4.8% DOA with ASICMiner USB

Edit: To be fair, I'm also running a p2pool backed mining pool[1], so that's probably why my DOA's are higher.
1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=234841.0

[baloo_kiev]

EDIT: On BFL's forums, some users are reporting > 100% efficiency with 5.5 GH/s miners. I thought reports here were that they don't work?
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/jalapeno-single-sc-support/3367-reducing-20%25-hash-rate-penalty-using-bfl-hardware-p2pool.html#post42224

Hi I'm that user on forums.butterflylabs.com talking about my jalepeno which works fine on p2pool, my current efficiency is 105%.  I'm not sure why the p2pool guide claims ASICs can't work on p2pool, it's working fine for me.  Once I get my 60GH singles in I'll be trying them there too so we'll see if they hold up as well.

It's odd, that's for sure.  You have 105% efficiency, but you also have a 20% DOA rate (which is horribly bad).  Not sure which number to believe...

Isn't 20% DOA pretty average for p2pool?

20% stale is OK. Local DOA must be no more than few percent with proper hardware (with miners in the same LAN where the node is). My AM USB gives 1.8% on localhost.

[yxxyun]

five days no block, bad luck!

[Subo1977]

five days no block, bad luck!

it's not luck. I'ts variance.....

the you will have day's with 5 Blocks

[bitpop]

5 days none, 1 day 5 blocks
No luck, just an average

[Amph]

tell me more about the 1 day 5 block
i'm ready

[bitpop]

You may subscribe to my bitpoppool prediction service

[zvs]

OK, so I've been looking at my orphans for the last 10 days or so.... about 33% of them occur after a block solve.

i guess i should also mention that 50% of them are orphaned by

1CTgYxMTY5j6SLytKeMsBWAXuUc6yNKcAe

and i know he isnt using an asic, so why so slow?

[freshzive]

Been testing my upgraded Jally on p2pool after the reports that BFL asics seemed to be doing OK. After around 18 hours, I'm seeing this:



Efficiency seems OK? DOA is high though, should I be worried about that? Guess I will let it run a few more days and see how payouts go once we start actually solving some blocks.

[baloo_kiev]

Dear forrestv and p2pool node hosters,

I've made a patch which provides adaptive share and pseudoshare difficulty to the miners. I believe it might be useful to help miners with little hashrate and reduce load by enforcing high difficulty for fast miners.

Difficulty is controled by the new '-d' command line option which can have 3 values: A - adaptive, F - force adaptive, and D (or any other) - default. Default behaves just in the same way as the original version. Adaptive provides adaptive difficulty if the miner hasn't specified desired difficulty. Force adaptive provides adaptive difficulty in any case (user's desired values are ignored).

Difficulty is calculated for each username based on its hashrate according to these target rates:
- 20 shares per min(estimated time to block, chain length * share period)
- 20 pseudoshares per 10 minutes
(per user)

Source: https://github.com/baloo-kiev/p2pool-adaptive
Test node: 78.27.191.182:8349

It's about 30 lines of code (commented where necessary).
Diff: https://github.com/baloo-kiev/p2pool-adaptive/commit/10e59b9564740c6b039380b5b86fdf8071543f48

Also, I've just found out that share difficulty has upper limit of 10 times current minimal difficulty. It is set by line 123 in p2pool/data.py

Code:

bits = bitcoin_data.FloatingInteger.from_target_upper_bound(math.clip(desired_target, (pre_target3//10, pre_target3)))

So I'd like to know what's the reason for this limitation and whether it can be changed to generate shares with even more difficulty.

[GrapeApe]

OK, so I've been looking at my orphans for the last 10 days or so.... about 33% of them occur after a block solve.

i guess i should also mention that 50% of them are orphaned by

1CTgYxMTY5j6SLytKeMsBWAXuUc6yNKcAe

and i know he isnt using an asic, so why so slow?

How do you know it was that address, and is it wrong to assume that you have his ip address? If so ban him don't send any more work his way. Not that it matters but that address has a huge balance by the way...

[salfter]

Been testing my upgraded Jally on p2pool after the reports that BFL asics seemed to be doing OK. After around 18 hours, I'm seeing this:



Efficiency seems OK? DOA is high though, should I be worried about that? Guess I will let it run a few more days and see how payouts go once we start actually solving some blocks.

I'm seeing only 84% efficiency with mine. What settings are you using? My miner name has +256 appended to it. A poster in the BFL forums is using /6000 and is getting results more like yours than mine. Given that share difficulty is only 1080 as I write this, though, wouldn't setting difficulty too high risk throwing out valid shares?

[gyverlb]

I'm seeing only 84% efficiency with mine. What settings are you using? My miner name has +256 appended to it. A poster in the BFL forums is using /6000 and is getting results more like yours than mine. Given that share difficulty is only 1080 as I write this, though, wouldn't setting difficulty too high risk throwing out valid shares?

What would be a good input to have to guess how good these ASICs are would be people comparing what their efficiency was with low-latency mining devices (GPUs/Icarus/Cairnsmore1/Ztex/...) and what is their efficiency with their BFL ASIC without any p2pool node reconfiguration.
If they have a mixed setup, knowing the total hashrate of the low-latency devices and the total hashrate of the BFL ASICs can do too.

Warning: don't use different payout addresses on your node: it currently adds latency in the P2Pool process and would lower efficiency.

Currently they don't seem horrible: 84% efficiency is the worst I'm aware of. It's bad but not far from what is good enough to make it almost as good as most pools (I consider the 90-95% range to be where P2Pool starts to be the best solution for mining).
Try to tune your setup according to my guide to see if you can reach a better efficiency (see my sig).

[zvs]

I'm seeing only 84% efficiency with mine. What settings are you using? My miner name has +256 appended to it. A poster in the BFL forums is using /6000 and is getting results more like yours than mine. Given that share difficulty is only 1080 as I write this, though, wouldn't setting difficulty too high risk throwing out valid shares?

What would be a good input to have to guess how good these ASICs are would be people comparing what their efficiency was with low-latency mining devices (GPUs/Icarus/Cairnsmore1/Ztex/...) and what is their efficiency with their BFL ASIC without any p2pool node reconfiguration.
If they have a mixed setup, knowing the total hashrate of the low-latency devices and the total hashrate of the BFL ASICs can do too.

Warning: don't use different payout addresses on your node: it currently adds latency in the P2Pool process and would lower efficiency.

Currently they don't seem horrible: 84% efficiency is the worst I'm aware of. It's bad but not far from what is good enough to make it almost as good as most pools (I consider the 90-95% range to be where P2Pool starts to be the best solution for mining).
Try to tune your setup according to my guide to see if you can reach a better efficiency (see my sig).

Isn't all that's required the base latency of the jalapeno?  How do they work?  Does it do work for 2s then spit out results?  1s?  1000ms should result in 10% DOA.

The orphans shouldnt deviate from what you'd get from using a GPU

[zvs]

OK, so I've been looking at my orphans for the last 10 days or so.... about 33% of them occur after a block solve.

i guess i should also mention that 50% of them are orphaned by

1CTgYxMTY5j6SLytKeMsBWAXuUc6yNKcAe

and i know he isnt using an asic, so why so slow?

How do you know it was that address, and is it wrong to assume that you have his ip address? If so ban him don't send any more work his way. Not that it matters but that address has a huge balance by the way...

nah, he's a major contributor to p2pool.  i think he's been mining it for years.   i'm just whining and wish he had a faster setup.  =p

I don't even know what IP he mines to, which I guess is part of the problem.  I think he's on a private node, probably with just 6 outgoing connections.

oh, I know it was that address since my orphan showed up in the 'headers' list... then I go to the parent share and click on child, and it shows what replaced your orphaned share (if it works the way I think it does, that replacement is actually dictated by the share that comes after it)

[baloo_kiev]

Been testing my upgraded Jally on p2pool after the reports that BFL asics seemed to be doing OK. After around 18 hours, I'm seeing this:



Efficiency seems OK? DOA is high though, should I be worried about that? Guess I will let it run a few more days and see how payouts go once we start actually solving some blocks.

I'm seeing only 84% efficiency with mine. What settings are you using? My miner name has +256 appended to it. A poster in the BFL forums is using /6000 and is getting results more like yours than mine. Given that share difficulty is only 1080 as I write this, though, wouldn't setting difficulty too high risk throwing out valid shares?

To little data to make judgements. At 108 total shares stale+doa rate is (23.1 +- 11.%. I mean that the real rate could be up to 34.9%, which gives efficiency of 83%. So to be sure, you need to wait to get more stats (several hundreds total shares).

[gilamonsterz]

bahaha 5 days later, well done all

[freshzive]

Alright, I'll wait it out a few more days and check efficiency again.

On a more positive note: WE FOUND A BLOCK!!!! AT LAST!!!

[gyverlb]

OK, so I've been looking at my orphans for the last 10 days or so.... about 33% of them occur after a block solve.

i guess i should also mention that 50% of them are orphaned by

1CTgYxMTY5j6SLytKeMsBWAXuUc6yNKcAe

and i know he isnt using an asic, so why so slow?

How do you know it was that address, and is it wrong to assume that you have his ip address? If so ban him don't send any more work his way. Not that it matters but that address has a huge balance by the way...

nah, he's a major contributor to p2pool.  i think he's been mining it for years.   i'm just whining and wish he had a faster setup.  =p

I can confirm that this address is mining since ages. The user behind may have changed his/her rigs since then but when the P2Pool mining started it was either GPU or FPGA based, seems the hashrate is fairly constant too: it always was around 50-60GH/s (computed from the payouts).

If he is reading this thread, he should definitely upgrade his setup: he's probably able to shave quite a few more bitcoins by lowering his bitcoind latency (which is probably the reason why his setup is orphaning zvs shares on occasion instead of building on top of them). This should help us too: he may have mined orphan blocks (not sure of the probabilities though).