Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 11:40:30 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 [347] 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2034036 times)
HellDiverUK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574


View Profile
November 06, 2013, 03:23:20 PM
 #6921

I'm about to install the bitcoin-qt client on the computer i'm running my miner through, I guess it takes a few days now... will it impair the efficiency of my asic machine?
I want to join p2pool but I have one computer I work on, and one that does the mining (which I had to replace recently - thus - no client  Cry ).  



If your machine is reasonably fast, it can run P2Pool, your miners, the lot.  Anything with an i3 or better is fine.

The main restriction with running your own node is bandwidth.  The average DSL connection can't provide what p2pool and bitcoin need to keep your stale rate low.

M

No, it isn't.  p2pool only needs a few tens of kilobytes per second.  You could do that on 512k DSL no problems.  It's getblocktemplate latency that's the issue, which is purely bitcoind hogging CPU. 

But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.
1481326830
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326830

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326830
Reply with quote  #2

1481326830
Report to moderator
1481326830
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326830

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326830
Reply with quote  #2

1481326830
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
matthewh3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
November 06, 2013, 04:09:04 PM
 #6922

is it normal to always only have 6 out connections? i mean, every once in a while i will see 7 or 8, but the majority of the time its only 6.

Im trying to find ways to really improve performance. I had an older machine running my node with just ubuntu server, but my efficiency was terrible, less than 80% after 48 hours. So i switched up to my windows laptop and currently running over 100% at just under 48 hours. my latency has also decreased. but i have only produced 1 share with 13gh/s. When i was running on my slower server i had produced nearly 5 shares 1 orphan in 48 hours.

I just think something is wrong here but i cant pinpoint it.

71.91.202.165:9332 is my node running on a 30Mbps cable connection.

yeah, 6 is the default.  restart p2pool and use  --p2pool-node 5.9.24.81 and --p2pool-node 198.12.127.2   ... that'll give you 8 outgoing connections, with guaranteed connection to two good nodes

the shares sound perfectly normal for 13gh/s... just a little bit unlucky

(oh, and you got lucky before that.. isn't it like 12hrs per share on avg?)

Won't forwarding the ports for bitcoin-qt give you a lot more nodes?

shogunmark
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33


View Profile
November 06, 2013, 04:13:39 PM
 #6923

Won't forwarding the ports for bitcoin-qt give you a lot more nodes?

I have 8333 forwarded
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
November 06, 2013, 04:45:00 PM
 #6924

I'm about to install the bitcoin-qt client on the computer i'm running my miner through, I guess it takes a few days now... will it impair the efficiency of my asic machine?
I want to join p2pool but I have one computer I work on, and one that does the mining (which I had to replace recently - thus - no client  Cry ).  



If your machine is reasonably fast, it can run P2Pool, your miners, the lot.  Anything with an i3 or better is fine.

The main restriction with running your own node is bandwidth.  The average DSL connection can't provide what p2pool and bitcoin need to keep your stale rate low.

M

No, it isn't.  p2pool only needs a few tens of kilobytes per second.  You could do that on 512k DSL no problems.  It's getblocktemplate latency that's the issue, which is purely bitcoind hogging CPU. 

But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.

The situation is usually more complicated (which is why people often don't agree here on what is enough/good for p2pool: they have widely different situations to compare).

getblocktemplate latency isn't much of an issue if you have a multi-core CPU and your system workload leaves at least one core free for p2pool even when bitcoind is hogging one core.
It's clearly a problem when you don't have this free core (p2pool slows down and your efficiency dives).

A 512k DSL is clearly enough, but this assumes you don't use it for anything else that makes your link latency rise.
If you can setup QoS on your DSL and eliminate the influence of other traffic then clearly you can use p2pool on a DSL link. Unfortunately it's often not simple to do: some routers actively shape the traffic the way they want without letting users have much to tune or making the rest of the traffic too unreliable.
Even with a decent knowledge and control of the QoS settings you can have problems. For example I shot myself in the foot once, my QoS settings were perfect for bitcoind and p2pool but they caused timeouts repeatedly in my irc client.

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
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
November 06, 2013, 05:58:21 PM
 #6925

The situation is usually more complicated (which is why people often don't agree here on what is enough/good for p2pool: they have widely different situations to compare).

getblocktemplate latency isn't much of an issue if you have a multi-core CPU and your system workload leaves at least one core free for p2pool even when bitcoind is hogging one core.
It's clearly a problem when you don't have this free core (p2pool slows down and your efficiency dives).

A 512k DSL is clearly enough, but this assumes you don't use it for anything else that makes your link latency rise.
If you can setup QoS on your DSL and eliminate the influence of other traffic then clearly you can use p2pool on a DSL link. Unfortunately it's often not simple to do: some routers actively shape the traffic the way they want without letting users have much to tune or making the rest of the traffic too unreliable.
Even with a decent knowledge and control of the QoS settings you can have problems. For example I shot myself in the foot once, my QoS settings were perfect for bitcoind and p2pool but they caused timeouts repeatedly in my irc client.

I made my statement based on my observations.  I have roughly 3mb down/768kb up connection.  I found from observation of using my own p2pool node over a period of a few weeks that my lowest stales occurred when I had no port forwarding turned on for bitcoin or for p2pool.   Even then it wasn't acceptable to me, as this isn't a dedicated link.  Download something and watch your stales/dead rate go through the roof.  I tried turning on qos, it made everything else unacceptable.

Now with the newer version of p2pool and ridiculous difficulty, for someone like me with ~12gh/s hash power, having that one share I get in an 18 hour period go stale is awful.  Probably wouldn't be so bad if you had 10x my hashrate, so I probably should have clarified my statement.  I thought I was responding to someone using about the same hashpower as me.

M

MMinerMonitor author, monitor/auto/schedule reboots/alerts/remote/MobileMiner for Ants and Spondoolies! Latest (5.2). MPoolMonitor author, monitor stats/workers for most pools, global BTC stats (current/nxt diff/USD val/hashrate/calc)! Latest (v4.2) 
Buyer beware of Bitmain hardware and services.
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
November 06, 2013, 09:41:36 PM
 #6926

The situation is usually more complicated (which is why people often don't agree here on what is enough/good for p2pool: they have widely different situations to compare).

getblocktemplate latency isn't much of an issue if you have a multi-core CPU and your system workload leaves at least one core free for p2pool even when bitcoind is hogging one core.
It's clearly a problem when you don't have this free core (p2pool slows down and your efficiency dives).

A 512k DSL is clearly enough, but this assumes you don't use it for anything else that makes your link latency rise.
If you can setup QoS on your DSL and eliminate the influence of other traffic then clearly you can use p2pool on a DSL link. Unfortunately it's often not simple to do: some routers actively shape the traffic the way they want without letting users have much to tune or making the rest of the traffic too unreliable.
Even with a decent knowledge and control of the QoS settings you can have problems. For example I shot myself in the foot once, my QoS settings were perfect for bitcoind and p2pool but they caused timeouts repeatedly in my irc client.

I made my statement based on my observations.  I have roughly 3mb down/768kb up connection.  I found from observation of using my own p2pool node over a period of a few weeks that my lowest stales occurred when I had no port forwarding turned on for bitcoin or for p2pool.   Even then it wasn't acceptable to me, as this isn't a dedicated link.  Download something and watch your stales/dead rate go through the roof.  I tried turning on qos, it made everything else unacceptable.

Now with the newer version of p2pool and ridiculous difficulty, for someone like me with ~12gh/s hash power, having that one share I get in an 18 hour period go stale is awful.  Probably wouldn't be so bad if you had 10x my hashrate, so I probably should have clarified my statement.  I thought I was responding to someone using about the same hashpower as me.

M

I have 25/2 bonded DSL and even uploading at 50KB/s on this piece of shit slows my connection down.  I have a server up right now that I'm not mining on, so I don't really care about it (and it gets shut off when I'm doing anything important).

QoS is PoS

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).
IYFTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


WANTED: Active dev to fix & re-write p2pool in C


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 01:50:43 PM
 #6927

So nice it has been implemented already. But I will agree with comments made earlier on, it should be applied to miners with 500 GH/s (1.7% of total p2pool hashrate). Please reduce it to at least 2% from 5%. It's a simple fix, and it will help a lot to small miners.

From experience, having "only" 2% of the p2pool hashrate doesn't mean there's too much variance (the rewards oscillate +/-~10% around).

With 5%, ~20 large miners can take most of the pie, leaving crumbs to others. With 2%, this is raised to 50 large miners.

I'd be OK with a 1% limit, but 2% should limit complains of high variance from large miners (the reward may even move as much from the hashrate fluctuations of the whole pool as from the share frequency variance, people with 5% or more may be able to confirm this if they have variance around 10% in their rewards too).

BTW: I've not looked into the code, what would happen if there were only 10 miners on p2pool? Is the current algorithm able to converge on sane values or would the current 5% target raise the individual share difficulty without bonds.
From the one-liner extract above it seems there's a missing parameter to achieve this protection (the number of distinct addresses with valid shares in the recent sharechain).

I will decrease the percentage then. Maybe 1.67%? That's a share every half hour.

If there are very few miners, nothing insane happens. Smiley Each miner's share difficulty multiplier becomes the maximum, 30, and then the 30-second share period target decreases the minimum difficulty until there's a share every 30 seconds again.

Has this been implemented yet? I'm considering turning my node back on to see if it improves anything..... Grin

Any news yet?

-- Smiley  Thank you for smoking  Smiley --  If you paid VAT to dogie for items you should read this thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018906.0
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
November 07, 2013, 03:16:47 PM
 #6928

So nice it has been implemented already. But I will agree with comments made earlier on, it should be applied to miners with 500 GH/s (1.7% of total p2pool hashrate). Please reduce it to at least 2% from 5%. It's a simple fix, and it will help a lot to small miners.

From experience, having "only" 2% of the p2pool hashrate doesn't mean there's too much variance (the rewards oscillate +/-~10% around).

With 5%, ~20 large miners can take most of the pie, leaving crumbs to others. With 2%, this is raised to 50 large miners.

I'd be OK with a 1% limit, but 2% should limit complains of high variance from large miners (the reward may even move as much from the hashrate fluctuations of the whole pool as from the share frequency variance, people with 5% or more may be able to confirm this if they have variance around 10% in their rewards too).

BTW: I've not looked into the code, what would happen if there were only 10 miners on p2pool? Is the current algorithm able to converge on sane values or would the current 5% target raise the individual share difficulty without bonds.
From the one-liner extract above it seems there's a missing parameter to achieve this protection (the number of distinct addresses with valid shares in the recent sharechain).

I will decrease the percentage then. Maybe 1.67%? That's a share every half hour.

If there are very few miners, nothing insane happens. Smiley Each miner's share difficulty multiplier becomes the maximum, 30, and then the 30-second share period target decreases the minimum difficulty until there's a share every 30 seconds again.

Has this been implemented yet? I'm considering turning my node back on to see if it improves anything..... Grin

Any news yet?

yeah, it's in a git commit from 3 or 4 days ago

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).
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 953



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 04:46:44 PM
 #6929

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!
Sanweb40
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 08:32:01 PM
 #6930

Hello,

can everyone tell me, how i can find the startup commands to start p2pool with PPLNS?

Thank you very much for any suggestions.

King regards
IYFTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


WANTED: Active dev to fix & re-write p2pool in C


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 09:44:52 PM
 #6931

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!

Is the hash rate increase due to multipool.us hooking up to p2pool? Or does it not show on the p2pool graph?

-- Smiley  Thank you for smoking  Smiley --  If you paid VAT to dogie for items you should read this thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018906.0
IYFTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


WANTED: Active dev to fix & re-write p2pool in C


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 09:46:33 PM
 #6932

Hello,

can everyone tell me, how i can find the startup commands to start p2pool with PPLNS?

Thank you very much for any suggestions.

King regards


https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool

-- Smiley  Thank you for smoking  Smiley --  If you paid VAT to dogie for items you should read this thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018906.0
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 953



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 10:06:07 PM
 #6933

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!

Is the hash rate increase due to multipool.us hooking up to p2pool? Or does it not show on the p2pool graph?
Spikes up to 60TH can be easily seen on the graph, just have a look.
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148

The most centralized thing in Bitcoin is expertise


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 10:06:44 PM
 #6934

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!

Is the hash rate increase due to multipool.us hooking up to p2pool? Or does it not show on the p2pool graph?
It likely is.
Their address is 146197ntzrBT41DDQRrB2STBb19dw7ct2F, the highest hashrate of all miners. Smiley

"The centralization measure is the cost of the option to create a new full node" - Measuring Decentralization
Why Bitcoin XT is a piece of nonsense
I AM HODLING
Sanweb40
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 11:36:17 PM
 #6935


Thank you, but on this side was no information about the needed parameters, that p2pool runs with PPLNS ...

Any Ideas, where i can found this information?
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 12:12:07 AM
 #6936

Thank you, but on this side was no information about the needed parameters, that p2pool runs with PPLNS ...

Any Ideas, where i can found this information?

P2Pool always uses PPLNS. There is no way to disable it.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
Sanweb40
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 12:49:50 AM
 #6937

Give it a methode by P2Pool to adjust the shares for PPLNS?
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 01:15:10 AM
 #6938

Give it a methode by P2Pool to adjust the shares for PPLNS?

You mean the N in PPLNS? Number of shares? That's hard-coded to 3 block-equivalents of shares. Why would you want to adjust it?

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
zvs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile WWW
November 08, 2013, 02:11:56 AM
 #6939

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!

Is the hash rate increase due to multipool.us hooking up to p2pool? Or does it not show on the p2pool graph?
It likely is.
Their address is 146197ntzrBT41DDQRrB2STBb19dw7ct2F, the highest hashrate of all miners. Smiley

it's only at 90% efficiency, hoho

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).
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148

The most centralized thing in Bitcoin is expertise


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 02:46:12 AM
 #6940

Indeed situation has been improved since commit Smiley
At the day of patch release, p2pool was on 36 TH/s with 161k share diff. Right now it's on 50.6 TH/s with 171k share diff. That's 40% hashrate increase with only 6% sharediff increase. Very nice surprise for small miners Smiley But we need more people to upgrade, so variance for small miners will go down even further. Please upgrade!

Is the hash rate increase due to multipool.us hooking up to p2pool? Or does it not show on the p2pool graph?
It likely is.
Their address is 146197ntzrBT41DDQRrB2STBb19dw7ct2F, the highest hashrate of all miners. Smiley

it's only at 90% efficiency, hoho
Maybe point this to them? If you know of a way to improve efficiency. Wink

"The centralization measure is the cost of the option to create a new full node" - Measuring Decentralization
Why Bitcoin XT is a piece of nonsense
I AM HODLING
Pages: « 1 ... 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 [347] 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 ... 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!