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

[ancow]

P2pool is binding to a port on your machine. That means your college can't influence that, all they can influence is communication between your machine and the rest of the world.
The only way your college could influence p2pool's ability to bind to a local port is by having some software installed on your machine, and then it likely wouldn't make any difference where you are, it will always get blocked.

Hm - I'd expect P2Pool to have problems if bitcoin is unable to access the internet ...

Also, it's not that unthinkable for environments (work, university, ?) to require certain software installed and running before you are able to access the internet - and that software could also cause issues.

No point assuming stuff until you know for sure it's true - though it is easy to check.

I seriously don't get your point here. Nobody mentioned whether bitcoin was able to access the internet, and that wouldn't lead to this particular error. I mentioned the possibility of some mandatory program interfering. I also don't see me assuming anything about the setup that wasn't mentioned.
My point here is simply that the off-campus test is probably unnecessary and it would make more sense to try to find out what is blocking that port (I probably should have been more explicit about that).

So again: what is your point?

[1714204823]

1714204823

[1714204823]

1714204823

[1714204823]

1714204823

[kano]

P2pool is binding to a port on your machine. That means your college can't influence that, all they can influence is communication between your machine and the rest of the world.
The only way your college could influence p2pool's ability to bind to a local port is by having some software installed on your machine, and then it likely wouldn't make any difference where you are, it will always get blocked.

Hm - I'd expect P2Pool to have problems if bitcoin is unable to access the internet ...

Also, it's not that unthinkable for environments (work, university, ?) to require certain software installed and running before you are able to access the internet - and that software could also cause issues.

No point assuming stuff until you know for sure it's true - though it is easy to check.

I seriously don't get your point here. Nobody mentioned whether bitcoin was able to access the internet, and that wouldn't lead to this particular error. I mentioned the possibility of some mandatory program interfering. I also don't see me assuming anything about the setup that wasn't mentioned.
My point here is simply that the off-campus test is probably unnecessary and it would make more sense to try to find out what is blocking that port (I probably should have been more explicit about that).

So again: what is your point?

...

1) If bitcoind cannot access the internet I'm certain that causes problems for P2Pool - then that may? be the cause of it since that may stop P2Pool for getting to the state where it will accept connections.

My point - if bitcoind aint working (blocked to the net - the bitcoin port is known to sometimes be on the 'bad' list) maybe that could be causing problems for p2pool ... ... ... easy to check - does p2pool say it is ready to accept connections (wherever in the log you can check for that? Or whatever the equivalent of linux "netstat -na" is in windows)

2) Hmm ...
Some environments REQUIRE certain software to be installed and running if you wish to access the internet.
e.g. work environments, university environments, maybe others?

My point - if such software is on his computer and only active when on campus, that software could be causing problems.
Does he have any extra software installed required on campus to get to the internet?

BOTH of these are easy to check ... ... ... rather than assuming they are not the cause of the problem.
They may not be the cause - but they are easy to check rather than assume.

(... Yeah I've had to deal with something recently where another IT guy assumed something simple was not worth checking.
2 months later ... that was the cause of the problem and cost my sister almost $900 in what would otherwise have been uneeded extra travelling costs during those 2 months)

[Gabi]

290ghash/s right now, update the title   

[Gabi]

We jave just reached 300GHASH/S

 

[stevegee58]

We jave just reached 300GHASH/S

 

That's because I just joined this morning. 

[Proofer]

Code:

2012-02-15 00:12:15.395427 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! a77ece01 bitcoin: http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000000828a0f68452b5c83cf3eb0767e46505648cd22f9f5785f5bb9

but blockexplorer.com says:  "No such block"

and bitcoind listtransactions says

Code:

"account" : "",
"category" : "orphan",
"amount" : 0.42083454,
"confirmations" : 0,
"time" : 1329293536 = 2012-02-15 00:12:16 -0800

My first orphan 

[terrytibbs]

Code:

2012-02-15 00:12:15.395427 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! a77ece01 bitcoin: http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000000828a0f68452b5c83cf3eb0767e46505648cd22f9f5785f5bb9

but blockexplorer.com says:  "No such block"

and bitcoind listtransactions says

Code:

"account" : "",
"category" : "orphan",
"amount" : 0.42083454,
"confirmations" : 0,
"time" : 1329293536 = 2012-02-15 00:12:16 -0800

My first orphan 

There are some orphans listed on http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks.

Better luck next time!

[ThiagoCMC]

We jave just reached 300GHASH/S

 

That's because I just joined this morning. 

WELCOME!!! 

[thatonegirlt]

I'm on Windows 7 64-bit. And I made sure I didn't have double instances running right now. Curious... I am at a college campus and they may be blocking the port somehow. I guess I'll have to check if I still get the error if I'm somewhere not on campus and report back.

Do you have Litecoin running? IIRC, they use the same port by default. You'll need to tell either p2pool or Litecoin to use a different port, if that's the case.

I actually do have Litecoin running, didn't even think of that. I'll try that.

& for the people talking about whether the internet connection effects p2p or not, I will tell you when I find out!

[Turbor]

Found out that downclocking my cards has a positive effect on stales (rejects) with cgminer 2.2.5. Also lowered intensity. I can see a nice increase in p2pools local hashspeed . Never had a HW reject or extreme clocks. Just funny to see.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Found out that downclocking my cards has a positive effect on stales (rejects) with cgminer 2.2.5. Also lowered intensity. I can see a nice increase in p2pools local hashspeed . Never had a HW reject or extreme clocks. Just funny to see.

Rejects can be either stale or invalid.  p2pool doesn't distinguish (AFAIK).  Prior to the point of crashing a GPU being overclocked will start to make the occasional math mistake resulting in invalid hashes.

High intensity is bad w/ p2pool because once a GPU starts working it can't stop.  Normally w/ average time between LP of 600 sec this doesn't make much difference.  With p2pool LP occur more common so more often and on average each LP you lose one half of the batch cycle due to wasted/stale data. 

Lower intensity makes the batch smaller thus less is wasted.

[breel]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

[kjj]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

I use a script to sweep any earnings into a different address.  It isn't a great solution, but it works.

[gnar1ta$]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

Why don't you just point all your miners to one p2pool merged mining instance?  I have 3 miners but only run one p2pool, bitcoind, and namecoind.

[P4man]

Had an idea.. how about we start a

Shafted Miner Relief Fund

The idea being to attract miners that have been "shafted" on hopped proportional pools or pools with insanely high fees.
Give them an incentive to switch over to p2pool. There is considerable potential, seeing how those exploited pools still maintain a 200GH+ base, and they should be relatively easy to convert as there is a real, direct financial benefit for them, even without said fund.

To qualify you could demand some proof (stats, screenshots, not sure what) that they have been mining for x months or generated Y shares on one of selected pools.

And as "relief" I would offer them a small signup bonus for getting p2pool installed and running, and a bonus on their revenue for the first 2 weeks or whatever, but long enough to keep them in and see their financial benefit despite high variability;  the height of the bonus would obviously depend on how big the fund gets and how many takers we get.

To fund the fund, perhaps forrestv or someone else can setup a donation p2p subpool were we can donate shares to?
 Perhaps we could even convince some of the hoppers to pay their fair share .

Thoughts?

[kjj]

If they are paying fees now, wouldn't switching to a negative fee pool like p2pool be reward enough?

[Red Emerald]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

Why don't you just point all your miners to one p2pool merged mining instance?  I have 3 miners but only run one p2pool, bitcoind, and namecoind.

Yeah. Do that. Way simpler.

I run 2 p2pool instances so that I can upgrade without any downtime.  I run most of my systems as VMs, so it's easy for me to have lots of systems.

[kano]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

Copying a wallet to multiple bitcoind's ... hmm ... I'm sure that's gonna come back and bite you some time in the future ...
e.g. if one of them ever allocates a new address range it won't be in the others ...

[P4man]

If they are paying fees now, wouldn't switching to a negative fee pool like p2pool be reward enough?

Maybe if you can get their attention. Offering a signup fee and bonus specifically aimed at that group would likely generate more interest than what they may perceive as "yet another 100+% pool". If they were paying attention, they wouldnt be mining at those pools, so the trick will be to reach them somehow.

Moreover, someone mining at deepbit may be turned down after 1 day of mining at p2pool after receiving nothing or only  a fraction of that they are used to. If you can convince them to mine a week or so, then they might actually see for themselves.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Actually how do I use the "--address" option with merged mining?
Do I use a "," to separate them?

Thanks!

You can't specify an address for the merged chain (yet).  The merged mining still needs some work.  The address is currently fetched automatically via the RPC

Ok, so I have put the same wallet(s) on all my mining machines, hence they all use the same addresse(s).
Is that an ok workaround?

Thank you!

Why don't you just point all your miners to one p2pool merged mining instance?  I have 3 miners but only run one p2pool, bitcoind, and namecoind.

DING DING DING.

If you are worried about fault tolerance make a second machine be the backup p2pool.  Then setup cgminer w/ 3 pools
p2pool - main
p2pool - backup
traditional pool

If the machine w/ your p2pool goes down, cgminer will point all miners to the backup p2pool and if it also goes down it will point everything at a traditional pool.