TierNolan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050


January 16, 2014, 11:05:02 AM 

P2pool pays out over 3 blocks on average. The pool is finding around 2 blocks per day. This means if you find a share, you will get 3 payouts spaced every 12 hours (on average).
If you find a share once every 3 days, it remains active for 1.5 days, so you have an active share for 50% of the time.

1LxbG5cKXzTwZg9mjL3gaRE835uNQEteWF







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



HellDiverUK


January 16, 2014, 03:06:04 PM 

So, just ran my 120GH on p2pool for 24 hours. Payout stands at 0.004BTC. That's shit. Barely pays for the power used running a PC all day.
Back to a real pool.




TierNolan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050


January 16, 2014, 03:34:10 PM 

So, just ran my 120GH on p2pool for 24 hours. Payout stands at 0.004BTC. That's shit. Barely pays for the power used running a PC all day.
Back to a real pool.
Payout is over 3 blocks, so takes 1.5 days to payout.

1LxbG5cKXzTwZg9mjL3gaRE835uNQEteWF



ksenter


January 16, 2014, 04:09:47 PM 

So, just ran my 120GH on p2pool for 24 hours. Payout stands at 0.004BTC. That's shit. Barely pays for the power used running a PC all day.
Back to a real pool.
Payout is over 3 blocks, so takes 1.5 days to payout. You should probably stop feeding the troll. He'll never use p2pool long enough or with any objectivity. He just knows he doesn't like it without having a valid reason. Btw, over the past 3 days I've gotten 0.085+ bitcoins with only 30Ghs. The 4 days prior to that I got 0 however. So yeah, variance... The good news is that over time I've always come out better than other pools. You just have to be patient. I completely understand though that people with low hashrates might prefer a different pool. But really everyone with hundreds of GHs should consider trying p2pool for a couple of weeks.




K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
/dev/null


January 16, 2014, 04:19:56 PM 

So, just ran my 120GH on p2pool for 24 hours. Payout stands at 0.004BTC. That's shit. Barely pays for the power used running a PC all day.
Back to a real pool.
Payout is over 3 blocks, so takes 1.5 days to payout. You should probably stop feeding the troll. He'll never use p2pool long enough or with any objectivity. He just knows he doesn't like it without having a valid reason. Btw, over the past 3 days I've gotten 0.085+ bitcoins with only 30Ghs. The 4 days prior to that I got 0 however. So yeah, variance... The good news is that over time I've always come out better than other pools. You just have to be patient. I completely understand though that people with low hashrates might prefer a different pool. But really everyone with hundreds of GHs should consider trying p2pool for a couple of weeks. it was allways the same with him/it and it will always be stupidity meets ignorance




smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302


January 16, 2014, 07:49:17 PM 

On average it'll take you about 3 days to find a share at current sharechain difficulty (770k). That means there will be dry periods much longer, and probably some days it's shorter. How about you drop the obvious bias? "Will" be dry periods, and "probably" some days its shorter? Seriously? There WILL be longer dry periods and there WILL be shorter dry periods. That is the nature of variance. But when your total hash rate translates to $2/day the absolute variance will not be much. You will NEVER underperform by more than $2/day. Another factor regularly overlooked with p2pool is the high reject rate. I know I was extremely disappointed when those 3 or 4 days would go by and I'd finally get that cherished share ... only to have it rejected. If you have a "high" reject rate then something is malfunctioning or misconfigured. A few percent or so rejects is normal and anything up to about 10% probably does not hurt your earnings relative to another pool. I tend to think you won't be getting $5 or $10 every few days with 12gh/s. Then you would be wrong. If your expected earnings are $2/day and you have multiple days of getting $0 then you WILL also have days of getting $6 or more. Mathematical certainty. Over periods of weeks you will very likely earn more than regular pools even with 12 GH. If you want to earn less, go right ahead, but stop spreading biased misinformation.




smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302


January 16, 2014, 08:00:37 PM 

Single blade antminer S1, Works fantastically on P2Pool:
Are you using any nonstandard configuration or settings? I'm planning to give p2pool another shot on my AntMiners next week. The hardware for the node is on order right now.




Ceballos


January 16, 2014, 08:36:10 PM 

Good Pool




mdude77
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358


January 16, 2014, 10:47:24 PM 

On average it'll take you about 3 days to find a share at current sharechain difficulty (770k). That means there will be dry periods much longer, and probably some days it's shorter. How about you drop the obvious bias? "Will" be dry periods, and "probably" some days its shorter? Seriously? There WILL be longer dry periods and there WILL be shorter dry periods. That is the nature of variance. But when your total hash rate translates to $2/day the absolute variance will not be much. You will NEVER underperform by more than $2/day. Another factor regularly overlooked with p2pool is the high reject rate. I know I was extremely disappointed when those 3 or 4 days would go by and I'd finally get that cherished share ... only to have it rejected. If you have a "high" reject rate then something is malfunctioning or misconfigured. A few percent or so rejects is normal and anything up to about 10% probably does not hurt your earnings relative to another pool. I tend to think you won't be getting $5 or $10 every few days with 12gh/s. Then you would be wrong. If your expected earnings are $2/day and you have multiple days of getting $0 then you WILL also have days of getting $6 or more. Mathematical certainty. Over periods of weeks you will very likely earn more than regular pools even with 12 GH. If you want to earn less, go right ahead, but stop spreading biased misinformation. [edited more than once] You're right, I think there was some bias in there. I'm not new to p2pool, nor new to mining. I've always been a small miner in p2pool, and the huge variance I experience hurts. And the 16% stale rate, on average, doesn't help matters. I thought a bit about why I stay away from p2pool and why I suggest other "small" miners do the same. It's the variance and the continued massive increases in difficulty. Over the roughly 2 week period between BTC difficulty increases, if you average a share every 3 days, that means there will be times when it's longer, and there will be times that it's shorter. Because of stale shares, there will be more longer periods than there will be shorter periods. If BTC difficulty never increased, it would even out in the end compared to everyone else in p2pool. The rub is in the difficulty increase. In that 2 week period I should get 4 shares on average, assuming share difficulty doesn't increase. But it is... so if I luck out and get 4 shares, or more, then great. But if I don't, I will do better on a standard pool with little variance (like BTC Guild). Maybe my math is wrong. The resident math expert will likely chime in here correcting me if I'm off. It may just be a feeling. Regardless, it seems to me because of the endless drastic difficulty increases, when I come out behind in that difficulty period, I will never catch up in the next difficulty period. And there will be times when I come out behind... so therefore I'm better off in a standard pool. Again, this applies to small miners. With share difficulty approaching 1m, I can't imagine pointing my measly 38 gh/s at p2pool. The variance would be awful, and before I know it, the BTC difficulty will increase again. 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.



mdude77
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358


January 17, 2014, 01:19:39 AM 

Maybe my math is wrong. The resident math expert will likely chime in here correcting me if I'm off. It may just be a feeling. Regardless, it seems to me because of the endless drastic difficulty increases, when I come out behind in that difficulty period, I will never catch up in the next difficulty period. And there will be times when I come out behind... so therefore I'm better off in a standard pool.
I'll use some extreme numbers for an example. The numbers will scale either way, I'm using these for simplicity. I'm ignoring pool fees (lower on p2pool usually than conventional pools), share difficulty increases (doesn't increase on conventional pools), and high rejects on p2pool (doesn't increase on conventional pools). Let's say for one given BTC difficulty period, according to average, I'm supposed to mine 1 BTC. That period is awful luck wise. I only get 50% of what I'm supposed to. Instead of 1 BTC, I get 0.5 BTC. The next period, my luck reverses. I make 50% more than I'm supposed to! But difficulty also increased 50%. I'm supposed to make 0.5BTC, on average, but instead I make 0.75BTC. For those periods, I made a total of 1.25BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would have made 1.5BTC. Let's try it with difficulty increasing 30%. 2nd period, my luck reverses. I'm supposed to make 0.7BTC, instead I make 1.05BTC. For those two periods, I should have made 1.7BTC. Instead I made 1.55BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would be a lot closer to 1.7BTC. Granted, this is not specific to p2pool. The same logic applies to any pool with high variance. What's unique to p2pool is the high share difficulty (increases variance) and rejects (also increases variance). Is there a flaw in my logic? 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.




IYFTech


January 17, 2014, 01:36:01 AM 

Hello again p2poolers OK, decided to switch my node on again after upgrading to 13.10. I'm struggling with getting slush's stratum proxy to play with p2pool so thought I'd ask here  does it work with p2pool? If so, can someone give me a heads up? Ta muchly




forrestv


January 17, 2014, 01:49:10 AM 

Maybe my math is wrong. The resident math expert will likely chime in here correcting me if I'm off. It may just be a feeling. Regardless, it seems to me because of the endless drastic difficulty increases, when I come out behind in that difficulty period, I will never catch up in the next difficulty period. And there will be times when I come out behind... so therefore I'm better off in a standard pool.
I'll use some extreme numbers for an example. The numbers will scale either way, I'm using these for simplicity. I'm ignoring pool fees (lower on p2pool usually than conventional pools), share difficulty increases (doesn't increase on conventional pools), and high rejects on p2pool (doesn't increase on conventional pools). Let's say for one given BTC difficulty period, according to average, I'm supposed to mine 1 BTC. That period is awful luck wise. I only get 50% of what I'm supposed to. Instead of 1 BTC, I get 0.5 BTC. The next period, my luck reverses. I make 50% more than I'm supposed to! But difficulty also increased 50%. I'm supposed to make 0.5BTC, on average, but instead I make 0.75BTC. For those periods, I made a total of 1.25BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would have made 1.5BTC. Let's try it with difficulty increasing 30%. 2nd period, my luck reverses. I'm supposed to make 0.7BTC, instead I make 1.05BTC. For those two periods, I should have made 1.7BTC. Instead I made 1.55BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would be a lot closer to 1.7BTC. Granted, this is not specific to p2pool. The same logic applies to any pool with high variance. What's unique to p2pool is the high share difficulty (increases variance) and rejects (also increases variance). Is there a flaw in my logic? M Yes. You're assuming that you'll have bad luck now and good luck later, but you have to look at all possible outcomes to calculate what you expect to happen. Using the average return for your case and the case where you have good luck now and bad luck later happens to be enough for the calculated return to be what it should be: First period: supposed to mine 1 BTC, mine 1.5 BTC instead (+50% luck) Second period: supposed to mine 0.5 BTC, mine 0.25 BTC instead (50% luck) You made 1.75 BTC, more than expected. Average of 1.25 BTC and 1.75 BTC = 1.5 BTC, what you're "supposed to mine."

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23



mdude77
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358


January 17, 2014, 02:00:15 AM 

Maybe my math is wrong. The resident math expert will likely chime in here correcting me if I'm off. It may just be a feeling. Regardless, it seems to me because of the endless drastic difficulty increases, when I come out behind in that difficulty period, I will never catch up in the next difficulty period. And there will be times when I come out behind... so therefore I'm better off in a standard pool.
I'll use some extreme numbers for an example. The numbers will scale either way, I'm using these for simplicity. I'm ignoring pool fees (lower on p2pool usually than conventional pools), share difficulty increases (doesn't increase on conventional pools), and high rejects on p2pool (doesn't increase on conventional pools). Let's say for one given BTC difficulty period, according to average, I'm supposed to mine 1 BTC. That period is awful luck wise. I only get 50% of what I'm supposed to. Instead of 1 BTC, I get 0.5 BTC. The next period, my luck reverses. I make 50% more than I'm supposed to! But difficulty also increased 50%. I'm supposed to make 0.5BTC, on average, but instead I make 0.75BTC. For those periods, I made a total of 1.25BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would have made 1.5BTC. Let's try it with difficulty increasing 30%. 2nd period, my luck reverses. I'm supposed to make 0.7BTC, instead I make 1.05BTC. For those two periods, I should have made 1.7BTC. Instead I made 1.55BTC. On a conventional pool with low variance, I would be a lot closer to 1.7BTC. Granted, this is not specific to p2pool. The same logic applies to any pool with high variance. What's unique to p2pool is the high share difficulty (increases variance) and rejects (also increases variance). Is there a flaw in my logic? M Yes. You're assuming that you'll have bad luck now and good luck later, but you have to look at all possible outcomes to calculate what you expect to happen. Using the average return for your case and the case where you have good luck now and bad luck later happens to be enough for the calculated return to be what it should be: First period: supposed to mine 1 BTC, mine 1.5 BTC instead (+50% luck) Second period: supposed to mine 0.5 BTC, mine 0.25 BTC instead (50% luck) You made 1.75 BTC, more than expected. Average of 1.25 BTC and 1.75 BTC = 1.5 BTC, what you're "supposed to mine." Good point about the average. However, when you factor in the additional variance introduced by high share difficulty and reject rate, and you get more variance than you would elsewhere. Yes? 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.



forrestv


January 17, 2014, 02:35:39 AM 

Good point about the average.
However, when you factor in the additional variance introduced by high share difficulty and reject rate, and you get more variance than you would elsewhere.
Yes?
M
P2Pool definitely has more variance than other pools; I'm not sure if it makes sense to say that difficulty changes contribute to P2Pool's variance more than they do to other pools (but I wouldn't be surprised if that were somehow true...) Difficulty changes definitely effectively "magnify" past variance relative to current earnings, at least.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23



IYFTech


January 17, 2014, 02:37:11 AM 

Hello again p2poolers OK, decided to switch my node on again after upgrading to 13.10. I'm struggling with getting slush's stratum proxy to play with p2pool so thought I'd ask here  does it work with p2pool? If so, can someone give me a heads up? Ta muchly Anyone?




theonewhowaskazu


January 17, 2014, 02:53:30 AM 

The biggest problem with p2pool is the fact that it reduces my Jupiter's hashrate SIGNIFICANTLY. Hopefully either KNC or P2pool devs will fix that soon.




theonewhowaskazu


January 17, 2014, 02:54:03 AM 

Hello again p2poolers OK, decided to switch my node on again after upgrading to 13.10. I'm struggling with getting slush's stratum proxy to play with p2pool so thought I'd ask here  does it work with p2pool? If so, can someone give me a heads up? Ta muchly Anyone? From my experience, it doesn't seem to work with p2pool at all. The BFG one will work, though.




IYFTech


January 17, 2014, 03:07:24 AM 

Hello again p2poolers OK, decided to switch my node on again after upgrading to 13.10. I'm struggling with getting slush's stratum proxy to play with p2pool so thought I'd ask here  does it work with p2pool? If so, can someone give me a heads up? Ta muchly Anyone? From my experience, it doesn't seem to work with p2pool at all. The BFG one will work, though. Thanks for the answer theonewhowaskazu. I used to use the bfgminer one, but it does not support longpoll & I was getting over 30% DOA/stale/rejects with p2pool. Is there a reason why it works with every other pool perfectly well but not p2pool? Seems a bit strange eh? Peace.




alanwgeorge
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 16


January 17, 2014, 03:11:50 AM 

I get these quite often. Is this from the miner connections or the BitcoinQt connection? Is it something I should worry about?
20140116 18:59:38.826198 > Unhandled error in Deferred: 20140116 18:59:38.826283 > Unhandled Error 20140116 18:59:38.826316 > Traceback (most recent call last): 20140116 18:59:38.826344 > Failure: twisted.internet.defer.TimeoutError: in ReplyMatcher
Thanks!




