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

[nreal]

2015-02-23 11:38:27.207584 New work for worker! Difficulty: 16500.000000 Share difficulty: 5601123.034554 Total block value: 25.004579 BTC including 1 transactions

[1713915391]

1713915391

[1713915391]

1713915391

[1713915391]

1713915391

[1713915391]

1713915391

[1713915391]

1713915391

[yslyung]

hi guys, since i upgraded & started to use latest version of p2pool from github by forrestv which says p2pool version unknown 7032706f6f6c2d6d6173746572 under windows usiong python & i've set the pseduo share diff manually for different type of miners such as :

btc add +500 for 5xs3 & the console shows :  New work for worker! Difficulty: 500.000000 Share difficulty: 4618833.547130 Total block value: 25.019008 BTC including 18 transactions (which is correct)

but for other miners i've set the pseduo share diff to +1000 (4 miners) & +1400 (42 miners) it does not show on the console (such as the New Work for worker line) ?

but the miners does hit & get shares. is there anything to be concern of in this case ?

in the older version 13.4 of p2pool it does show the New Work for worker for every other miner. but i did check the miners individually, the last diff is the diff i set ie, +1000 or +1400.

and if i do not add the +1000 or +1400 it does show the new work for worker once in a while in very high numbers. but in the older version 13.4 .exe of p2pool it shows up frequently.

same results when i'm using latest .exe version from raven, only the 13.4 .exe version works/shows the info properly.

there are multiple miners using the same settings under the same btc add.

tia for any help or info.

IMO the maximum setting of pseudo share diff is below 1000.
If you set a higher diff then the real pseudo share diff is reduced to less than 1000.
Search for this in your logfile

Code:

New work for worker! Difficulty: 999.9 

that is for older versions of p2pool.

as mentioned earlier if "older versions of p2pool" max is 999.9 where i can see in my miners last share diff which is correct. but with newer versions and with the +1000 or +1400 settings i see it in my miner under last share diff but it does not show on the p2pool console which is weird & i do hit shares.

 i think if version above 13.4 is much higher like nreal mentioned or showed post above.

[Songminer]

Ahhhh.... That makes sense.  No problem.  When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.

Thanks.  I was kinda kidding.. kinda...

[jonnybravo0311]

Ahhhh.... That makes sense.  No problem.  When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.

Thanks.  I was kinda kidding.. kinda...

Sent.  TxID: ae4ed57e199a5bfe7340fc8cca987e7b81cdc689252578366ac107ae88619e66

[Songminer]

Ahhhh.... That makes sense.  No problem.  When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.

Thanks.  I was kinda kidding.. kinda...

Sent.  TxID: ae4ed57e199a5bfe7340fc8cca987e7b81cdc689252578366ac107ae88619e66

Thank you sir.  Much respect.

[yslyung]

i'm seeing something new loos like this:

 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   7f5c445aefe16dadf9d034987d92ea0fdab8858c3768316e8249cb18e3a573f0
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   d594c702a72053c85ea406c6e4576728dfc5442d9f761b4ea41d519693ddbf02
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   11a603b52bae21b2f3d02eaa1287351d37535fcccdc78f3587d1bfb4924082ca
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   d37f104c487529eb0ff8fdd853da4a2a9a69b4da7474bb9ab17d40f0f8160fe8
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   c6609eb8c32b59fae1cd319943c6be4580b905ad971c9dabafbf3bcc5f4555fc
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   d306ff51474a5d04e6f63fd56105cd1d3b78edb23284e2b5b52b66fd5b10dca6
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
 Worker 1HASS7upxMixmxqgNrjdbv9DrHF1edbMzT submitted share with hash > target:
     Hash:   bb781c88eda897a0ab003d0034b26962ef0ad97eb70f6948adb251d4bb340079
     Target: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

[aurel57]

Ahhhh.... That makes sense.  No problem.  When the block is found I'll send you over any BTC my node's payout address receives.

Thanks.  I was kinda kidding.. kinda...

Sent.  TxID: ae4ed57e199a5bfe7340fc8cca987e7b81cdc689252578366ac107ae88619e66

Thank you sir.  Much respect.

I have to agree about jonnybravo0311 as well.

[jonnybravo0311]

Another block... hooray!

Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid.  TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add

0.00681057BTC

[aurel57]

Another block... hooray!

Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid.  TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add

0.00681057BTC

I just moved a couple more miners back and was thinking of renting some again. 

[jonnybravo0311]

Another block... hooray!

Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid.  TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add

0.00681057BTC

I just moved a couple more miners back and was thinking of renting some again. 

I wish this had happened a few weeks ago when I was pushing 200-400TH/s of rented gear onto p2pool... slowly building the wallet balance back up, though.

[aurel57]

Another block... hooray!

Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid.  TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add

0.00681057BTC

I just moved a couple more miners back and was thinking of renting some again.  

I wish this had happened a few weeks ago when I was pushing 200-400TH/s of rented gear onto p2pool... slowly building the wallet balance back up, though.

I rented about a 1/10 of that and will do so again in 24 hours to pick up some shares and spread them out some as well.

[Songminer]

Another block... hooray!

Songminer, I sent you the shares my node's wallet was paid.  TxID: 8b972bf0aa7b574cc2dc4679a9ba28de62ce3887692bb96d217428b828714add

0.00681057BTC

Thanks Again!  Hoping this is a continuing trend and will get the pool hash up again!

[nreal]

If p2pool is the best paying pool, I suggest that we create a honey pot that node owners put their default payout address, where the node fees goes to. With that income someone trusted like windpath rents miningpower and the result is donated back to users.
P2pool gets little more speed and it would be fun to see how it goes.

[Chupacabras]

Spondoolies vs Antminers???

Who is the best for P2pool?

[TheAnalogKid]

Spondoolies vs Antminers???

Who is the best for P2pool?

Either works fine.  I run both S5's and SP35's and they work equally well.  I like the build quality of the Spondoolies gear over the Antminers hands down.

Biggest issue is latency.  I rent my miners also and I see very big swings in hash power for the same gear with folks who I know have used pool servers physically distant from where my miners are.

[PatMan]

If p2pool is the best paying pool, I suggest that we create a honey pot that node owners put their default payout address, where the node fees goes to. With that income someone trusted like windpath rents miningpower and the result is donated back to users.
P2pool gets little more speed and it would be fun to see how it goes.

I would much rather see a honey pot created in order to attract a dev capable of rewriting p2pool & fixing the variance/scaling issues mentioned many times over the last 2 years. It's pointless throwing more hash power at p2pool in it's current form.

[yslyung]

If p2pool is the best paying pool, I suggest that we create a honey pot that node owners put their default payout address, where the node fees goes to. With that income someone trusted like windpath rents miningpower and the result is donated back to users.
P2pool gets little more speed and it would be fun to see how it goes.

I would much rather see a honey pot created in order to attract a dev capable of rewriting p2pool & fixing the variance/scaling issues mentioned many times over the last 2 years. It's pointless throwing more hash power at p2pool in it's current form.

+1 for fix. i'm in. anyone else ?

[armedmilitia]

If p2pool is the best paying pool, I suggest that we create a honey pot that node owners put their default payout address, where the node fees goes to. With that income someone trusted like windpath rents miningpower and the result is donated back to users.
P2pool gets little more speed and it would be fun to see how it goes.

I would much rather see a honey pot created in order to attract a dev capable of rewriting p2pool & fixing the variance/scaling issues mentioned many times over the last 2 years. It's pointless throwing more hash power at p2pool in it's current form.

+1 for fix. i'm in. anyone else ?

I'll throw something into the pot.

[windpath]

I'm 100% on board for getting this done, and managing the bounty if you folks want, but this is not a small task....

We would need to define the criteria for success, i.e. what constitutes "fixing it" first.

Maintaining P2Pool's decentralized and trust-less nature would be one of my top priorities.

Keeping things trust-less and decentralized while increasing pool hash rate, decreasing variance and including regular payouts for small miners is not an easy problem to solve.

I'm open to any ideas, but until one of us bumps our head in the shower and comes up with a theoretically working solution I would not know how to proceed...

[jonnybravo0311]

I'm 100% on board for getting this done, and managing the bounty if you folks want, but this is not a small task....

We would need to define the criteria for success, i.e. what constitutes "fixing it" first.

Maintaining P2Pool's decentralized and trust-less nature would be one of my top priorities.

Keeping things trust-less and decentralized while increasing pool hash rate, decreasing variance and including regular payouts for small miners is not an easy problem to solve.

I'm open to any ideas, but until one of us bumps our head in the shower and comes up with a theoretically working solution I would not know how to proceed...

Pretty sure I've bumped my head a few times too many