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

[windpath]

Any remote p2pool node means more latency ... running centralised p2pool nodes like a lot of people do already, means people are getting more rejects than the very high rejects p2pool has by default.

This is absolutely true.

P2Pool is inherently faster and more efficient when run locally. This means you make more money running your own node. If you can, do it!

This is what P2Pool is designed for.

For those that can't, or just want to check it out, mining to a nearby low-latency 0% fee node is a great option.

At this stage of the game, where we are 1% of the hashrate if we are lucky, talking about a "centralized" p2pool node is about the equivalent of discussing a single infantry solders role in the victory of a war.

P2Pool still remains the only 100% trustless solution for pooled mining, it is the only 100% transparent pool where you have full control if you run your own node.

If you mine on someone else's node, then you are trusting them to a small degree to acknowledge your shares and to include what you believe a reasonable amount of transactions in a block.

If you mine on a centralized pool you are trusting them with much more, particularly your earnings.

[1714179717]

1714179717

[1714179717]

1714179717

[1714179717]

1714179717

[vulgartrendkill]

With all this talk of high DOA rates etc, I've been trying to decide what is best for my mining equipment.   I have 3 S5's situated in a Chinese datacentre. I am in the UK.

These miners run through a Miningrigrental pool (main one in EU) which gives me immediate control over switching of nodes should I need to.  I'm currently on Coin Cadence, but I wondered how I can reduce my DOA?

Would it be best to:

1. Choose a node nearest the physical location of my equipment?  For example in China.

2. Choose a node nearest to the miningrigrental server? For example in Europe.

or

3. Choose or create a node nearest to my personal physical location?  For example in The UK .

Or something else?

Sorry for the long question.  I'm quite new to P2pool.

Thanks

[Prelude]

If you're going through a MRR server, you want your P2Pool node to be as close to that server as possible.

[vulgartrendkill]

If you're going through a MRR server, you want your P2Pool node to be as close to that server as possible.

Thank you!

[windpath]

With all this talk of high DOA rates etc, I've been trying to decide what is best for my mining equipment.   I have 3 S5's situated in a Chinese datacentre. I am in the UK.

These miners run through a Miningrigrental pool (main one in EU) which gives me immediate control over switching of nodes should I need to.  I'm currently on Coin Cadence, but I wondered how I can reduce my DOA?

My node is going to be awful routing from China to the UK then to Ashburn VA, a share would literally travel around the world before it hit a p2pool node.

If you really want to stick with MRR then I'd look for nodes close to them, or ask them if they know of a low latency P2Pool node nearby.

This is still not ideal because MRR adds 2 hops between your miners and P2Pool.

[yslyung]

With all this talk of high DOA rates etc, I've been trying to decide what is best for my mining equipment.   I have 3 S5's situated in a Chinese datacentre. I am in the UK.

These miners run through a Miningrigrental pool (main one in EU) which gives me immediate control over switching of nodes should I need to.  I'm currently on Coin Cadence, but I wondered how I can reduce my DOA?

Would it be best to:

1. Choose a node nearest the physical location of my equipment?  For example in China.

2. Choose a node nearest to the miningrigrental server? For example in Europe.

or

3. Choose or create a node nearest to my personal physical location?  For example in The UK .

Or something else?

Sorry for the long question.  I'm quite new to P2pool.

Thanks

the closer the better (miner to node). you can try to ping from your miner location *if you can*

this would give you an idea http://nodes.p2pool.co/

in asia you can try my node http://captminerp2pool.ddns.net:9332

if you need help to setup you can join irc webchat on my node too.

now whereisblock ? me hungry

[windpath]

P2Pool made #19 on Business Insiders list of the top 21 mining pools, pretty cool, but we can do better

http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-pools-miners-ranked-2015-7

[p3yot33at3r]

P2Pool made #19 on Business Insiders list of the top 21 mining pools, pretty cool, but we can do better

http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-pools-miners-ranked-2015-7

Businessinsider........

[jonnybravo0311]

They just yanked that data from blocktrail.  And, the article is pretty full of errors.  Describing ck.'s solo pool as people pooling their resources to find a block faster, but only the block finder gets the reward is completely wrong.  Then they just cut/paste the same thing for kano's pool.  Also, p2pool.org?  That's not even a node... it's an information site run by windpath.

[p3yot33at3r]

now whereisblock ? me hungry

There it is 

Nom nom.......

[notbatman]

Wow, p2pool has defiantly been rocking lately! I need more S5s...

[yslyung]

sorry for the downtime on my node. pc crashed & had to rebuild db & it took a while. back online now.

ah yum yum yum & a block.

a block a day, keeps the  . . . . . . . . . . away

[windpath]

Just wanted to share a couple things with everyone to maintain transparency:

1. I have been testing P2Pool with BitcoinXT on my development node, it works as expected with really no performance differences at all.

2. In the next couple weeks(TM) I'll be releasing Chain Query (alpha: http://chainquery.com) on Github, once thats done I plan to rewrite my P2Pool node front end to use Chain Query and MySQL (the core P2Pool code does not need to be altered) and will relaunch http://minefast.CoinCadence.com on BitcoinXT with the new front end. I will release the full source for the new front end on Github.

The switch to XT is a personal decision, and shows my support for scaling Bitcoin. I believe it is the right path.

If you don't like the idea of bigger blocks and mine on my node you are welcome to find another that runs Bitcoin Core, or run your own.

My intention is not to start some debate about block size in this thread, there is plenty of that elsewhere.

As P2Pool miners we vote with our hashrate, in the coming months that hashrate on my node will be running off of BitcoinXT.

I hope that many of you (P2Pool node operators) will join me in supporting Bitcoin's growth by voting with your hashrate, I know that some of you will not, and thats your choice.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Cheers.

[yslyung]

Just wanted to share a couple things with everyone to maintain transparency:

1. I have been testing P2Pool with BitcoinXT on my development node, it works as expected with really no performance differences at all.

2. In the next couple weeks(TM) I'll be releasing Chain Query (alpha: http://chainquery.com) on Github, once thats done I plan to rewrite my P2Pool node front end to use Chain Query and MySQL (the core P2Pool code does not need to be altered) and will relaunch http://minefast.CoinCadence.com on BitcoinXT with the new front end. I will release the full source for the new front end on Github.

The switch to XT is a personal decision, and shows my support for scaling Bitcoin. I believe it is the right path.

If you don't like the idea of bigger blocks and mine on my node you are welcome to find another that runs Bitcoin Core, or run your own.

My intention is not to start some debate about block size in this thread, there is plenty of that elsewhere.

As P2Pool miners we vote with our hashrate, in the coming months that hashrate on my node will be running off of BitcoinXT.

I hope that many of you (P2Pool node operators) will join me in supporting Bitcoin's growth by voting with your hashrate, I know that some of you will not, and thats your choice.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Cheers.

much thx windpath ! if there's a guide & some explanation of differences or why will be awesome.

i can give it a try to see how things goes.

whereisblock ? hungry !

[windpath]

Thanks.

Mike Hearn just published what I think is an awesome article about it here:

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

You can get precompiled binaries for XT and more info here:

http://xtnodes.com/

And here is the XT repo:

https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt

[Meuh6879]

For me, the next month ... i  have activate the pruning mode to restrict the Bitcoin Core installation at 50 Go : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1097636.0

For the block size, i wait the decision of BIP101 ... and stay at Bitcoin Core.

[Richy_T]

...as can be seen, my usage rarely goes above 40kBs download & 34kBs upload, so running one p2pool node & one Bitcoin wallet is not a problem on even the slowest ADSL line. It's simply a case of setting maxconnections on your wallets & making sure your QOS settings are right, no changes to p2pool connections are needed - I use the standard settings. If you are still having bottleneck issues/slowdowns after checking your settings then it's time to buy a new router......

Edit: The only time you will drown your network is when you sync your wallets/p2pool (ie: restarts etc).

Possibly you are correct. I need to fire up league of legends, watch the ping and do some analysis. I have a very basic setup right now.

To be clear, it's not like the connection is swamped, it's just that gaming is sensitive. I need to take another look at the QOS because turning that on killed my p2p payouts back in the day. But I may have been over-throttling bitcoind.

[jedimstr]

Just wanted to share a couple things with everyone to maintain transparency:

1. I have been testing P2Pool with BitcoinXT on my development node, it works as expected with really no performance differences at all.

2. In the next couple weeks(TM) I'll be releasing Chain Query (alpha: http://chainquery.com) on Github, once thats done I plan to rewrite my P2Pool node front end to use Chain Query and MySQL (the core P2Pool code does not need to be altered) and will relaunch http://minefast.CoinCadence.com on BitcoinXT with the new front end. I will release the full source for the new front end on Github.

The switch to XT is a personal decision, and shows my support for scaling Bitcoin. I believe it is the right path.

If you don't like the idea of bigger blocks and mine on my node you are welcome to find another that runs Bitcoin Core, or run your own.

My intention is not to start some debate about block size in this thread, there is plenty of that elsewhere.

As P2Pool miners we vote with our hashrate, in the coming months that hashrate on my node will be running off of BitcoinXT.

I hope that many of you (P2Pool node operators) will join me in supporting Bitcoin's growth by voting with your hashrate, I know that some of you will not, and thats your choice.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Cheers.

And that's why you've got my spare mining nodes pointed in your direction...
Let's hope more test the waters soon.  It will take much more than just us few on p2pool to bring mining consensus to BitcoinXT.

[jonnybravo0311]

Unless the changes forrestv recently made to support BIP66 also include support for BIP101 and the far larger block size, even if you are using an XT node, wouldn't you still be restricted?  Also, assuming the p2pool code does indeed support the larger blocks... what happens when any p2pool node on XT happens to find a block that is too large for inclusion on the blockchain?  Wouldn't the rest of the network reject it?

[windpath]

Unless the changes forrestv recently made to support BIP66 also include support for BIP101 and the far larger block size, even if you are using an XT node, wouldn't you still be restricted?  Also, assuming the p2pool code does indeed support the larger blocks... what happens when any p2pool node on XT happens to find a block that is too large for inclusion on the blockchain?  Wouldn't the rest of the network reject it?

Hey JB, the switch (fork) wont happen until Jan 2016 if, and only if, 75% of all blocks mined come from XT, right now it's 0 risk and a way to support a block size increase.

BitcoinXT and Bitcoin Core both share the same data directories and block files, you can switch between XT and Core today with the same data directory with no problem at any time.

Download and fire up XT for a few minuets, it is largely the same as QT (there is a diff on git), with the exception of the scheduled fork in Jan 2016 (if 75% of mined blocks vote for it) and a couple other things outlined on the git repo.

If you don't like it for some reason, you can switch back to core in a matter of seconds...