Bitcoin Forum
March 19, 2024, 04:47:54 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 [401] 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2591571 times)
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 14, 2014, 04:33:53 AM
 #8001

No not me. I'm only splitting two ways so the fee function works for that. I did consider at one point that if I needed to split more ways I would find the fee function (random split) in the code and modify it, but I haven't needed it yet.

Ah ok. In addition to the struggle to think of things that would entice miners to use my nodes for some appropriate fee %, there's also the feeling anything I do I should just commit to the project and make open source as well. Which, of course, then ends up giving me nothing but a sense of accomplishment but no way to pay for my servers. Smiley
The block chain is the main innovation of Bitcoin. It is the first distributed timestamping system.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1710823674
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1710823674

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1710823674
Reply with quote  #2

1710823674
Report to moderator
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 14, 2014, 04:43:38 AM
 #8002

Yes that is the question. I'm not sure you can flat out dismiss "technical" concerns. Maybe things like graphs and so forth are important. There may be other feature issues. For example, I know a few people have mentioned automatic splitting of payouts for farms with investors and group buys as being an attractive feature of ghash.io. I'm personally using the fee function in p2pool for that, but that only gives a two-way split, and it means I can't really open up my node for public use, which I might otherwise do. (There are no public nodes in my geographic area as far as I can tell.) Marketing and awareness are also important of course.

Honestly until you mentioned it this evening I'd never even seen this sort of feature mentioned before. I did some searching and here's a post talking about exactly what you said, and it is why they use ghash.io:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=406194.msg4409010#msg4409010

The only issue is ghash.io is holding your coins, and they pay out on precise %s. In p2pool's world, you can't split a share like that so the best you can do is approximate it by allocating work with the mining address assigned out with the %s you want to pay out to. Which won't be as exact.

Edit: You know, it'd be possible to code this up where it's all passed in the username. Does a pool username have a max length in programs like cgminer/bfgminer? Since + and / are already used, one could add support in p2pool for a syntax like ADDR1*.5,ADDR2*.3,ADDR3*.2 as your username to split the payment address in work servers to your miner(s) randomly between those addresses at those %s.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 14, 2014, 05:13:16 AM
 #8003

In case you are, or in case there are other readers as confused as I, you can think about it like this: the number of p2Pool shares a miner submits per time period is an approximately Poisson distributed random number. This means that the standard deviation of this number is proportional to the square root of the mean. As the share submission rate increases, the standard deviation only increases as the square root of the mean, so a miner with a greater share submission rates has, proportionally, a much lower standard deviation.

The key word you are using there, which contributes much to the confusion, is proportionately. In fact the standard deviation, measured in units of dollars, btc, or anything else is higher for the larger miner. It grows more slowly than the mean, but it still grows. A small miner has a small standard deviation in absolute terms.

organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 14, 2014, 05:32:45 AM
 #8004

In case you are, or in case there are other readers as confused as I, you can think about it like this: the number of p2Pool shares a miner submits per time period is an approximately Poisson distributed random number. This means that the standard deviation of this number is proportional to the square root of the mean. As the share submission rate increases, the standard deviation only increases as the square root of the mean, so a miner with a greater share submission rates has, proportionally, a much lower standard deviation.

The key word you are using there, which contributes much to the confusion, is proportionately. In fact the standard deviation, measured in units of dollars, btc, or anything else is higher for the larger miner. It grows more slowly than the mean, but it still grows. A small miner has a small standard deviation in absolute terms.

Yes, we've covered that before, but there's no point in considering "absolute terms". Few people consider anything related to BTC in "absolute terms". In fact I can't think of many situations in which there are useful BTC related charts which are not log-linear.


Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 14, 2014, 06:05:00 AM
 #8005

Yes, we've covered that before, but there's no point in considering "absolute terms". Few people consider anything related to BTC in "absolute terms". In fact I can't think of many situations in which there are useful BTC related charts which are not log-linear.

Bitcoin in absolute terms are what you spend (or save). In fact the number you are quoting, standard deviation divided by mean, has no units at all. It's a number that doesn't exist in the real world, only on graphs.
murraypaul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 14, 2014, 12:38:30 PM
 #8006

In case you are, or in case there are other readers as confused as I, you can think about it like this: the number of p2Pool shares a miner submits per time period is an approximately Poisson distributed random number. This means that the standard deviation of this number is proportional to the square root of the mean. As the share submission rate increases, the standard deviation only increases as the square root of the mean, so a miner with a greater share submission rates has, proportionally, a much lower standard deviation.
The key word you are using there, which contributes much to the confusion, is proportionately. In fact the standard deviation, measured in units of dollars, btc, or anything else is higher for the larger miner. It grows more slowly than the mean, but it still grows. A small miner has a small standard deviation in absolute terms.

A standard deviation in absolute terms makes no sense conceptually.
Small miners suffer from much higher variance on p2pool than large miners.
You don't care because they aren't earning much anyway, they do.
p2pool may be a poor choice for small miners anyway, because the payouts they do end up receiving will be in many tiny chunks which will end up costing them more to spend than a single payout from a normal pool.

BTC: 16TgAGdiTSsTWSsBDphebNJCFr1NT78xFW
SRC: scefi1XMhq91n3oF5FrE3HqddVvvCZP9KB
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 14, 2014, 01:56:05 PM
 #8007

Yes, we've covered that before, but there's no point in considering "absolute terms". Few people consider anything related to BTC in "absolute terms". In fact I can't think of many situations in which there are useful BTC related charts which are not log-linear.

Bitcoin in absolute terms are what you spend (or save). In fact the number you are quoting, standard deviation divided by mean, has no units at all. It's a number that doesn't exist in the real world, only on graphs.


Now you're just being wilfully silly.

A person that has one bitcoin that loses one bitcoin proportionally loses much more than a person that has a thousand bitcoins and also loses one bitcoin. In absolute terms, however, they've lost the same amount. I doubt either of them will be thinking of the loss in absolute terms.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 14, 2014, 06:08:14 PM
 #8008

A person that has one bitcoin that loses one bitcoin proportionally loses much more than a person that has a thousand bitcoins and also loses one bitcoin. In absolute terms, however, they've lost the same amount. I doubt either of them will be thinking of the loss in absolute terms.

Yes, I agree. Risk relative to assets does matter.

But there is no direct relationship between your hash rate and your assets, so risk relative to hash rate does not necessarily matter. Where I already said I agree is that someone who is poor (you said poor country but the wealth of the individual matters more) should be more concerned about smaller risks.

In other words, if you want to manage risk in "relative" terms, the correct denominator to use is assets, not hash rate. What this means in practice for hobby miners is they need not be overly concerned about variance.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 14, 2014, 06:21:53 PM
 #8009

p2pool may be a poor choice for small miners anyway, because the payouts they do end up receiving will be in many tiny chunks which will end up costing them more to spend than a single payout from a normal pool.

This is a good point. Maybe it should be possible to store deferred payouts in the share chain up to some minimum and apply them to a future block, the way eligius does. There is definitely value in coinbase payouts and the pool not having a wallet (though in practice eligius does have a wallet) while at the same time not paying out a tiny slice of every single block to every single miner.

I don't know if this can be made hop proof though.
smoothrunnings
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 14, 2014, 11:50:32 PM
 #8010

Is there anyway to disable the wallet function in P2Pool and have it instead forward the percentage of shares the note is to receive to a different wallet?

I have hit a stumbling block; over a week a go I initiated a transfer of over 1/2 a bitcoin and Bitcoin-QT told me I need to account for 0.0004 of the fee, so I did that and ever since the transfer has been in limbo, it looks like bitcoin-qt gave me the wrong fee to account for it if I understand the blockchain correctly.

https://blockchain.info/tx-index/7bbbc7b5fac8c2973e9c62a17cead946b9cf1832aac47479799ce566fafabcc1

Also I need to figure out if can fix this issue or have I lost those coins? Sad

Thanks,



correct fee for that is 0.0004, the fee on link provided is 0.00004

chances of getting into a block that is less than 10k (or 27k if it's priority)  in size is slim

This goes back to my initial problem with bition-qt/bitcoind when it comes to sent transactions. I am trying to transfer 0.31779405 bitcoins and I am getting this dialog from bitcoin-qt, its not hard to imagine that with my 0.59xxx bitcoins the number was 0.00004 not 0.0004 ...


KyrosKrane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 295
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
March 15, 2014, 08:02:04 AM
 #8011

Is there anyway to disable the wallet function in P2Pool and have it instead forward the percentage of shares the note is to receive to a different wallet?

I have hit a stumbling block; over a week a go I initiated a transfer of over 1/2 a bitcoin and Bitcoin-QT told me I need to account for 0.0004 of the fee, so I did that and ever since the transfer has been in limbo, it looks like bitcoin-qt gave me the wrong fee to account for it if I understand the blockchain correctly.

https://blockchain.info/tx-index/7bbbc7b5fac8c2973e9c62a17cead946b9cf1832aac47479799ce566fafabcc1

Also I need to figure out if can fix this issue or have I lost those coins? Sad

Thanks,



correct fee for that is 0.0004, the fee on link provided is 0.00004

chances of getting into a block that is less than 10k (or 27k if it's priority)  in size is slim

This goes back to my initial problem with bition-qt/bitcoind when it comes to sent transactions. I am trying to transfer 0.31779405 bitcoins and I am getting this dialog from bitcoin-qt, its not hard to imagine that with my 0.59xxx bitcoins the number was 0.00004 not 0.0004 ...



I'm reasonably sure there's a bug somewhere in bitcoin-qt that causes transaction fees to be off by a factor of ten. Basically it adds an extra zero after the decimal point. I've had three transactions hit with this issue, where the fee that bitcoin-qt asks for is exactly 1/10th what the rest of the network is expecting. This causes my transactions to take many hours (in one case, over a day) until they get confirmed.  That said, this is probably off-topic for this thread.

Tips and donations: 1KyrosREGDkNLp1rMd9wfVwfkXYHTd6j5U  |  BTC P2Pool node: p2pool.kyros.info:9332
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 15, 2014, 12:53:12 PM
 #8012

Switch to Electrum. Smiley
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 17, 2014, 03:02:31 AM
 #8013

I opened a recruiting thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=518920

Hope it can make a difference.
phillipsjk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.


View Profile WWW
March 17, 2014, 08:17:48 AM
Last edit: March 17, 2014, 08:49:23 AM by phillipsjk
 #8014

Well I think the results are in: pypy is not really faster than python c modules on my machine (FreeBSD 9.2).



The left grouping is python2.7, the grouping on the right is pypy(2.0 I believe).

CPU usage is hard to compare directly.  It appears to be proportional to the amount of data relayed on the network though. It takes time for the number of active connections to recover after a restart. The drop-off near the end was caused by an Internet outage.

I am assuming the large spikes in the pypy side of the graph are caused by disk cache misses. The disk is a SSD, so a lag of an extra second would probably have to correspond to over 500 seeks (assuming 2ms each). P2Pool being run by pypy appears to use about 3x the memory as P2Pool run by python (1200 vs 400 MB). My memory usage graph is blank for some reason.



As you can see, the DOA rate does not change much. If anything overall hash-rate goes down a bit as the number of connections go up. My machine is limited to 16 connections.

When going back to python, I used the following options:
Code:
-O     : optimize generated bytecode slightly; also PYTHONOPTIMIZE=x
-s     : don't add user site directory to sys.path; also PYTHONNOUSERSITE

The first option was used just in case it helps. The second option was intended to undo/ignore my handywork in this post.



James' OpenPGP public key fingerprint: EB14 9E5B F80C 1F2D 3EBE  0A2F B3DE 81FF 7B9D 5160
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 17, 2014, 09:30:40 AM
 #8015

Somewhat odd results there. Are you short on RAM, maybe swapping? I get a pretty big drop in latency and CPU usage using pypy on a low end dual-core AMD box, but I also see the increased memory usage (but I have 8 GB so not an issue). I don't see latency spikes at all.

Does FreeBSD do huge pages? I found that helps on Linux, probably even more with pypy given the bigger memory footprint, though I didn't measure that.

IYFTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


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


View Profile
March 17, 2014, 12:23:22 PM
 #8016

I opened a recruiting thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=518920

Hope it can make a difference.

That went well.........



Don't be upset with a p2pool user because he pointed out the blindingly obvious - be upset about the lack of development/bug fixing/improvements by the "devs" of p2pool who are taking donations for nothing Wink

PS: If you are having to restart your node every week I suggest you take another look at your setup/hardware - something ain't right there dude.

-- 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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
March 17, 2014, 12:31:06 PM
 #8017

As I said, if you don't like the job the developers are doing, tell them about it here. That's appropriate.  Better yet offer specific suggestions or volunteer to do some of the work yourself, or sponsor it.

Crashing a thread asking miners to try p2pool (and offering to help them do so) with complaints about the p2pool developers is not appropriate. Especially while doing nothing constructive about any of the issues you or I have identified.

PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
March 17, 2014, 01:40:21 PM
Last edit: March 17, 2014, 07:16:57 PM by PatMan
 #8018

As I said, if you don't like the job the developers are doing, tell them about it here. That's appropriate.  Better yet offer specific suggestions or volunteer to do some of the work yourself, or sponsor it.

Crashing a thread asking miners to try p2pool (and offering to help them do so) with complaints about the p2pool developers is not appropriate. Especially while doing nothing constructive about any of the issues you or I have identified.



Think I'll chime in here - been a while since I posted anything on the p2pool thread, mainly because I gave up with p2pool a while ago due to the exact reasons IYFTech pointed out in your doomed thread begging for miners.

Offering to help new users setup p2pool correctly when you are obviously having difficulty setting up your own node is unwise. Having to reboot every week means you have done something wrong, even with all the bugs in p2pool, you should not have to do this.

I used to mine at p2pool in the pre-asic age when it worked pretty well. Things started going tits up when stratum was implemented, but this was finally sorted out after many months of wrangling due to a few so called "gurus" denying that there was anything wrong, when there obviously was. Next up was the asic problem, nothing worked with p2pool apart from a select few items that had to be fiddled with & coaxed into playing nicely with p2pool (including special firmware) while all the time the same "gurus" denied there was ever a problem & it was every body else's fault. If you scroll back through the p2pool pages you will see this, every mention of any problem with p2pool was instantly dismissed by the "gurus" who would accuse miners of not knowing what they were doing & even told to go mine somewhere else. Great PR eh? Although I notice that things have slightly improved in this respect as most of the "gurus" seem to have moved on themselves......

I got so frustrated with not only the lack of development with p2pool but also the unwillingness of certain "guru" users to even admit that p2pool could be improved, that I even tried to set up a more user friendly version over 10 months ago:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=213051.0

My problem was not finding someone capable of coding such a program, it was finding a coder who understood the bitcoin protocol/mining process & implementing that into the software - but after much discussion & searching I was reluctantly forced into dropping the project. What IYFTech said in your thread about ease of use, GUI, wizard installer etc is 100% correct & is exactly what I was trying to achieve & I can't help but think that if I had been able to get the project off the ground p2p mining would be in a much healthier state than it is now, as would the network in general due to the decentralized nature of p2p mining, which is the one thing everyone seems to agree on.

Nothing changes with p2pool. It is a classic case of someone having a good idea a few years ago & then resting on their laurels expecting it to be fine forever more, while watching the donations roll in. It's the same old story here, always has been, always will be. Adapt & improve or die - it's as simple as that.

Peace  Grin

Edit: The issues that you say you have identified have been known about for well over a year - the problem is that nothing has been done about it.

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
IYFTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


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


View Profile
March 17, 2014, 02:02:03 PM
 #8019

+1

Dude, great minds & all that........ Cheesy Cheesy

-- 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
phillipsjk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.


View Profile WWW
March 17, 2014, 04:59:09 PM
Last edit: March 17, 2014, 05:09:24 PM by phillipsjk
 #8020

Somewhat odd results there. Are you short on RAM, maybe swapping? I get a pretty big drop in latency and CPU usage using pypy on a low end dual-core AMD box, but I also see the increased memory usage (but I have 8 GB so not an issue). I don't see latency spikes at all.

There is a little bit of swap use, but the only things using more than about 16MB are Bitcoind and P2Pool. Together they use about 2GB of my 3.3GB of available memory. By "cache miss", I meant the OS had to go to disk at all (the Bitcoin blockchain does not fit in RAM).

Looking at that graph a second time, it appear that the first spike starts to ramp up over an hour or so. Not sure what would cause that (maybe a peer downloading the block-chain?). If your machine has 8GB of RAM, it is probably newer than mine. Maybe pypy JIT overhead is negligible on newer hardware.

One other possibility is that pypy did lower latency, making my machine the first choice for information on the network. The resulting work then increased latency (Bitcoind is running "niced" for some reason). Edit: The spike in data-out after the latency spike may indicate this if the time-scale was not days. May need to re-test if I get a new CPU/motherboard.

Keep in mind the the python packages on FreeBSD appear to use c-optimized modules by default. This may diminish any JIT performance advantages.

Edit: While we are making feature requests: I would like to see a p2pool block template latency graph, if that is possible. Would take a lot of guess-work out of my testing.


James' OpenPGP public key fingerprint: EB14 9E5B F80C 1F2D 3EBE  0A2F B3DE 81FF 7B9D 5160
Pages: « 1 ... 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 [401] 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 ... 814 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!