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

[ghedipunk]

180 / 1.4 = 128 (almost exactly)

There's no point in using a lower difficulty with p2pool. You're just wasting your own CPU cycles.

That's about 71% of 180, not 30% of 180.

If you want to get technical, the best difficulty is 32,768 regardless of your local hashrate, because unless about a third of the users dropped out of the network, the difficulty per P2Pool share won't drop that low.  Every share found below the current P2Pool difficulty is useful only for local statistics.  Unless you're implementing a sub-pool that has a different share tracking method, those shares are wasted.

[organofcorti]

180 / 1.4 = 128 (almost exactly)

There's no point in using a lower difficulty with p2pool. You're just wasting your own CPU cycles.

That's about 71% of 180, not 30% of 180.

If you want to get technical, the best difficulty is 32,768 regardless of your local hashrate, because unless about a third of the users dropped out of the network, the difficulty per P2Pool share won't drop that low.  Every share found below the current P2Pool difficulty is useful only for local statistics.  Unless you're implementing a sub-pool that has a different share tracking method, those shares are wasted.

And every hash you produce before you find a share is wasted? This is the basis of "proof of work", isn't it?

[xyzzy099]

I have a problem I don't really understand, and I'm hoping one of you can give me some useful advice...

I was running a P2Pool node for a while, and I seem to remember that my Bitcoind GetBlockTemplate Latency from the graphs page was consistently ~0.2s.

I started mining on a different pool for a couple of weeks, then came back to P2Pool - and now, my Bitcoind GetBlockTemplate Latency is staying up at ~1.1s!  That seems pretty high to me, especially since bitcoind and P2Pool are running on the same machine.

As far as I can tell, the only thing that's different is that I am using 13.3 now, and was using 13.2 before.  I have not tried reverting to 13.2...  Maybe that's an experiment I should try, but I didn't see any change in the release notes that should affect this.

If it makes any difference, the platform is Win7 64-bit.

Anyone have any idea what might be going on here?

[Krak]

180 / 1.4 = 128 (almost exactly)

There's no point in using a lower difficulty with p2pool. You're just wasting your own CPU cycles.

That's about 71% of 180, not 30% of 180.

If you want to get technical, the best difficulty is 32,768 regardless of your local hashrate, because unless about a third of the users dropped out of the network, the difficulty per P2Pool share won't drop that low.  Every share found below the current P2Pool difficulty is useful only for local statistics.  Unless you're implementing a sub-pool that has a different share tracking method, those shares are wasted.

I don't know where you're getting the random 30% number, but the formula I posted is the tried and proven method for keeping your shares per minute at the sweet spot between accurate stat tracking and bandwidth/CPU savings.

[hagenees]

Hallo, is that possible to mine on p2pool with Block erupter blade? If yes, then tell me please how to configure it.

[ghedipunk]

I don't know where you're getting the random 30% number, but the formula I posted is the tried and proven method for keeping your shares per minute at the sweet spot between accurate stat tracking and bandwidth/CPU savings.

I got it from this post by astutiumRob:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg3244309#msg3244309

That's the formula that yurtesen was having trouble with.

[ghedipunk]

180 / 1.4 = 128 (almost exactly)

There's no point in using a lower difficulty with p2pool. You're just wasting your own CPU cycles.

That's about 71% of 180, not 30% of 180.

If you want to get technical, the best difficulty is 32,768 regardless of your local hashrate, because unless about a third of the users dropped out of the network, the difficulty per P2Pool share won't drop that low.  Every share found below the current P2Pool difficulty is useful only for local statistics.  Unless you're implementing a sub-pool that has a different share tracking method, those shares are wasted.

And every hash you produce before you find a share is wasted? This is the basis of "proof of work", isn't it?

With P2Pool, yes, each share below the P2Pool difficulty is wasted.

P2Pool's definition of proof of work is when you create a P2Pool blockchain block.  While using P2Pool, you can create a block on the Bitcoin blockchain without creating a block on the P2Pool blockchain (well, the P2Pool block would be created, but it would be orphaned).

Unless you were part of a sub-pool that used a P2Pool node for its main income, then redistributed the income out to the contributors, then the shares below P2Pool's difficulty are only useful for statistical purposes.  This is NOT the same as putting your Bitcoin address as the username when connecting to a P2Pool node.

[IYFTech]

Anybody else seeing this since the latest git pull?



Running p2p Version: 13.3-27-g740e306 on Xubuntu 12.04 64bit.

Normally runs at a constant 350ish - now it's gone superman.....up, up & away 

Nope? Just me then.

Rebooted.

Sorted.

Strangeness 

[hagenees]

Hallo, is that possible to mine on p2pool with Block erupter blade? If yes, then tell me please how to configure it.

Maybe somebody know an answer to this question?

[xyzzy099]

I have a problem I don't really understand, and I'm hoping one of you can give me some useful advice...

I was running a P2Pool node for a while, and I seem to remember that my Bitcoind GetBlockTemplate Latency from the graphs page was consistently ~0.2s.

I started mining on a different pool for a couple of weeks, then came back to P2Pool - and now, my Bitcoind GetBlockTemplate Latency is staying up at ~1.1s!  That seems pretty high to me, especially since bitcoind and P2Pool are running on the same machine.

As far as I can tell, the only thing that's different is that I am using 13.3 now, and was using 13.2 before.  I have not tried reverting to 13.2...  Maybe that's an experiment I should try, but I didn't see any change in the release notes that should affect this.

If it makes any difference, the platform is Win7 64-bit.

Anyone have any idea what might be going on here?

Does anyone have any idea what might be the problem here?

[xyzzy099]

Hallo, is that possible to mine on p2pool with Block erupter blade? If yes, then tell me please how to configure it.

Maybe somebody know an answer to this question?

You will need to use a proxy - either BFGMiner or one of the stratum proxies - other than that it is pretty straight forward.  Configure the blade to connect to the proxy, and configure the proxy to connect to P2pool.  My experience is that you will see a very high DOA rate from the blades on P2Pool.

[Subo1977]

We need a bann-funkction for Clients on public-nodes:

On my node there is a unknown worker wich produces >30% of DOA and massivly
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961081 Worker xxx  submitted share with hash > target:
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961407     Hash:   a9b3716dfc6ad5c4e8145dc2b5529e497e8f45e85cd616d3c6119b00
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961601     Target:  fd1f6b8accdf2000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

what can I /we do again so Workers?
can Dev implement some Score-Function to bann such nodes?

Greets

Subo

[maqifrnswa]

Pool rate: 60.9TH/s (15% DOA+orphan) Share difficulty: 69700
Expected time to block: 2.92 hours

wow, haven't had that large of the network in a long time (ever?)

[HellDiverUK]

BTCGuild is dead due to DDoS, so I'm guessing a lot of the high-power folks have a P2Pool set up as backup.

Edit: It seems slush's, 50BTC and a few other big pools are being nerfed by the big DDoS bat today.

[Subo1977]

BTCGuild is dead due to DDoS, so I'm guessing a lot of the high-power folks have a P2Pool set up as backup.

Edit: It seems slush's, 50BTC and a few other big pools are being nerfed by the big DDoS bat today.

thats the benefit from a decentralized Pool like p2poll :-) nobody can hit it.

[gyverlb]

BTCGuild is dead due to DDoS, so I'm guessing a lot of the high-power folks have a P2Pool set up as backup.

Edit: It seems slush's, 50BTC and a few other big pools are being nerfed by the big DDoS bat today.

thats the benefit from a decentralized Pool like p2poll :-) nobody can hit it.

That's not accurate, it's just more difficult and would cost more time and resources to really DoS the whole P2Pool network. There are many more servers to DoS (DoS and DDoS tools don't know how to iterate through all P2Pool servers this would have to be done separately and distributing the attack on all nodes would have to be done manually). Many servers have weaker Internet connectivity and would be easy to DoS but them being DoSed wouldn't disrupt the rest of the network.

In case of an attack trying to disrupt P2Pool, it would probably be only effective in disrupting a handful of nodes and people with backups would probably not even notice it.

[Subo1977]

BTCGuild is dead due to DDoS, so I'm guessing a lot of the high-power folks have a P2Pool set up as backup.

Edit: It seems slush's, 50BTC and a few other big pools are being nerfed by the big DDoS bat today.

thats the benefit from a decentralized Pool like p2poll :-) nobody can hit it.

That's not accurate, it's just more difficult and would cost more time and resources to really DoS the whole P2Pool network. There are many more servers to DoS (DoS and DDoS tools don't know how to iterate through all P2Pool servers this would have to be done separately and distributing the attack on all nodes would have to be done manually). Many servers have weaker Internet connectivity and would be easy to DoS but them being DoSed wouldn't disrupt the rest of the network.

In case of an attack trying to disrupt P2Pool, it would probably be only effective in disrupting a handful of nodes and people with backups would probably not even notice it.

did You know how many p2pool-nodes exist?

[HellDiverUK]

did You know how many p2pool-nodes exist?

http://p2pool-nodes.info/

[zvs]

We need a bann-funkction for Clients on public-nodes:

On my node there is a unknown worker wich produces >30% of DOA and massivly
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961081 Worker xxx  submitted share with hash > target:
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961407     Hash:   a9b3716dfc6ad5c4e8145dc2b5529e497e8f45e85cd616d3c6119b00
2013-09-30 12:41:24.961601     Target:  fd1f6b8accdf2000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

what can I /we do again so Workers?
can Dev implement some Score-Function to bann such nodes?

Greets

Subo

well, you could just firewall it yourself

i get a lot of that too, but it doesn't matter to me... i guess it makes your stats look worse, but i've always had fee set to 0% on bitcoin pool anyway

[dlasher]

thats the benefit from a decentralized Pool like p2poll :-) nobody can hit it.

<snip>

That's not accurate, it's just more difficult and would cost more time and resources to really DoS the whole P2Pool network. There are many more servers to DoS (DoS and DDoS tools don't know how to iterate through all P2Pool servers this would have to be done separately and distributing the attack on all nodes would have to be done manually). Many servers have weaker Internet connectivity and would be easy to DoS but them being DoSed wouldn't disrupt the rest of the network.

In case of an attack trying to disrupt P2Pool, it would probably be only effective in disrupting a handful of nodes and people with backups would probably not even notice it.

well said.. I'm hoping more and more people put up p2pool nodes, which helps with the survivability.

Is there any sort of "front end" that you can connect to by name, that finds the fastest/closest p2pool server to you?