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

[vulgartrendkill]

my payouts were a solid .03 to .086 per block,  now dropped to .006?  exactly same hashrate. Colour me confused....

did you stop hashing or continuously ?

Not that I know of...

[squidicuz]

my payouts were a solid .03 to .086 per block,  now dropped to .006?  exactly same hashrate. Colour me confused....

Have you been finding less shares?

Your payout may change based on the amount of shares you find, and the variation of the pools hashrate.  If the pool hashrate goes down, the pools [share] difficulty goes down and you will earn a little more due to finding more shares.  If the pools hashrate increases, you will earn less.  The other side of this is as the pools hashrate increases, more blocks should be found; and as the pools hashrate decreases less blocks would be found. 

So your payout may change based on the pools hashrate, if your hashrate stays the same.

[jonnybravo0311]

my payouts were a solid .03 to .086 per block,  now dropped to .006?  exactly same hashrate. Colour me confused....

Have you been finding less shares?

Your payout may change based on the amount of shares you find, and the variation of the pools hashrate.  If the pool hashrate goes down, the pools [share] difficulty goes down and you will earn a little more due to finding more shares.  If the pools hashrate increases, you will earn less.  The other side of this is as the pools hashrate increases, more blocks should be found; and as the pools hashrate decreases less blocks would be found. 

So your payout may change based on the pools hashrate, if your hashrate stays the same.

Typically when your expected payout drops way down, it's because you're either finding fewer than expected shares (variance) or the shares you are finding are orphaned or DOA.  Also, take a look at the node on which you're mining.  If the node's hash rate will lead it to finding a lot of shares, the node will adjust the share difficulty up to compensate.  You can counteract this by using the "/" parameter in your miner user name:

Code:

BTC_ADDRESS/1

This will tell the node that no matter what it determines the share difficulty to be, you want it to accept shares of minimum network difficulty from you.

[Meuh6879]

Not that I know of...

that's why you MUST run your node on a local machine to view the prodution ... not use a remote P2Pool node that it count only the shares produces ...

[Meuh6879]

Example with orphans (shares, you have ... reward, you doesn't ...)

[vulgartrendkill]

Thank you for the information everyone.  At the moment I am using a +4096 difficulty on the end of my BTC address.  Is this a good idea or should I perhaps try the /1 as suggested?  Would there be a huge difference?

[jonnybravo0311]

Those are two different and separate parameters, with different functions.  The "+" is the pseudo-share difficulty.  It's primary function is to provide you with feedback.  If you look at your miner logs, you'll only see accepts for shares greater than the value you use here.  The lower the number, the more shares you submit, the smoother the graphs become.

The "/" parameter is actual share difficulty, and its functionality is as I described in my previous post.

[Richy_T]

Just ran across this and wanted to make sure any developer was aware. It's not likely to affect me but could save some tears...

rpc: Implement random-cookie based authentication
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6388

[windpath]

Just ran across this and wanted to make sure any developer was aware. It's not likely to affect me but could save some tears...

rpc: Implement random-cookie based authentication
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6388

Interesting feature, P2Pool requires -rpcpassword to be explicitly set, so it will have no effect.

From the commit:

When no -rpcpassword is specified, use a special 'cookie' file for authentication.

[Richy_T]

Interesting feature, P2Pool requires -rpcpassword to be explicitly set, so it will have no effect.

Don't think so. I don't use it. I'm pretty sure it reads it from bitcoin.conf if it's not set explicitly.

Code:

  BITCOIND_RPCUSERPASS  bitcoind RPC interface username, then password, space-
                        separated (only one being provided will cause the
                        username to default to being empty, and none will
                        cause P2Pool to read them from bitcoin.conf)

[windpath]

Interesting feature, P2Pool requires -rpcpassword to be explicitly set, so it will have no effect.

Don't think so. I don't use it. I'm pretty sure it reads it from bitcoin.conf if it's not set explicitly.

Code:

  BITCOIND_RPCUSERPASS  bitcoind RPC interface username, then password, space-
                        separated (only one being provided will cause the
                        username to default to being empty, and none will
                        cause P2Pool to read them from bitcoin.conf)

You know, you may be right, I've never tried it without the user and pass....

For me starting p2pool looks something like this:

Code:

python ./run_p2pool.py RPC_USER RPC_PASS

RPC user and pass always set, it may work without it on localhost, will give it a try when I get a chance.

[p3yot33at3r]

Has there been any word from forrestv as to weather this new "XT" client is actually compatible with p2pool with it's different block size params?

[yslyung]

hmmm . . .

Age 0d 0h 36m 20s
Found 2015-08-21 10:02:59   
Block # 0    
Block Hash 0000000000000000111beccb385466b36c2850ad0b0f5bd9c43ed3c0e1905289   
Reward 25.15033780   
Miners 251   
Share e1905289
Luck 0.01%   -

YaY ! a block

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 1ibw1GDfJBMkdZtPqaXuwhmzpzsjykDHS! Est hashrate 1041.22 GH/s

https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000111beccb385466b36c2850ad0b0f5bd9c43ed3c0e1905289


the estimated hashrate seems to be out ? comments on that windpath ? it does jumps up & down quite a bit recently.

[luthermarcus]

Has there been any word from forrestv as to weather this new "XT" client is actually compatible with p2pool with it's different block size params?

I'm using XT. Working good here. Still looking into what it actually patches and how it effects mining. Any info would be appreciated.

I wonder how this will change mining? Would it give Big pools a bigger advantage?
I know KNC are supporting it and that's one of there biggest sponsors.
Of course Bitmain is for this too.
Coming to a hard-fork means I'm supporting it at the moment.
"ChinaPool" is definitely going to kick it's weight around if this flies or not.
How do you feel about this please share.

[windpath]

Has there been any word from forrestv as to weather this new "XT" client is actually compatible with p2pool with it's different block size params?

No, but I've texted XT with P2Pool and it works as expected.

[yslyung]

the btc gods are listening & blessing us

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 1Haabi6hZdDwxk1SCYusntAy9uFCYDYz15!  https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000144389d0d817f2b390a6330762fce3d014fca19380f4b74c  estimated hashrate 9419.08 GH/s

pool hashsrate below 1 phs

p2p go go go

[jonnybravo0311]

Has there been any word from forrestv as to weather this new "XT" client is actually compatible with p2pool with it's different block size params?

I'm using XT. Working good here. Still looking into what it actually patches and how it effects mining. Any info would be appreciated.

XT implements BIP101, among other things like improved double spend tracking.  BIP101 allows for increasing maximum block size, thereby removing the 1MB cap currently in place.

If you find a block with an XT node, you'll be able to tell because the version number will be different.  Currently, all blocks found by Core software are version 3.  Blocks found by XT are version 536870919.

Right now, it makes no difference because BIP101 (larger block sizes) doesn't go into effect until 1/11/2016 at the earliest.  However, come that date if 75% of blocks found are by XT then larger block support goes into effect and we've got a hard fork.

[p3yot33at3r]

Another block!   Nom...Nom.....

The 7/30 day luck stats are impressive.

[CartmanSPC]

Has there been any word from forrestv as to weather this new "XT" client is actually compatible with p2pool with it's different block size params?

I'm using XT. Working good here. Still looking into what it actually patches and how it effects mining. Any info would be appreciated.

XT implements BIP101, among other things like improved double spend tracking.  BIP101 allows for increasing maximum block size, thereby removing the 1MB cap currently in place.

If you find a block with an XT node, you'll be able to tell because the version number will be different.  Currently, all blocks found by Core software are version 3.  Blocks found by XT are version 536870919.

Right now, it makes no difference because BIP101 (larger block sizes) doesn't go into effect until 1/11/2016 at the earliest.  However, come that date if 75% of blocks found are by XT then larger block support goes into effect and we've got a hard fork.

Have any blocks been found by a node running XT?

If it does fork to support larger block sizes I believe a code change on p2pool would need to be done for it to create larger blocks.

[jonnybravo0311]

Thus far the only XT blocks found have been mined by Slush.  Sure, some of the other pools are putting things like "8MB" in their coinbase sigs, but they aren't mining to XT.  A few nodes here in p2pool are now, or are planning to very soon, use XT.