wariner
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1250
Merit: 1004
pool.sexy
|
|
February 17, 2016, 06:00:01 AM |
|
you confirm me that for bitcoin classic it's enough use bitcoin classic instead of bitcoin core? or need change something on this line? p2pool/p2pool/work.py 372 version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 4), You need to change the version in the line you quoted (372 in work.py) to: version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x30000000), or version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 805306368), Both work. Thank you But i'm come back to bitcoin core, to me it seems more efficient at this time compared to classic...you have noticed the same thing?
|
Pool.sexy - Pool ETH-ETC-EXP-UBQ-ZEC-DBIX..and more low fee Discussionmy BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
|
|
|
|
|
Once a transaction has 6 confirmations, it is extremely unlikely that an attacker without at least 50% of the network's computation power would be able to reverse it.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
|
|
February 17, 2016, 12:41:30 PM |
|
Classic and XT are based on 0.11.2 + somes 0.12.0 features. 0.12.0 RC5 is really a good build for all.
|
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 17, 2016, 04:49:25 PM |
|
Classic and XT are based on 0.11.2 + somes 0.12.0 features. 0.12.0 RC5 is really a good build for all.
Both Core and Classic version 12 are release candidates and not recommended for mining. That being said, on my testing node the speed improvements are impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
|
February 17, 2016, 07:23:05 PM |
|
Thanks for the heads up windpath - done.
|
|
|
|
wariner
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1250
Merit: 1004
pool.sexy
|
|
February 18, 2016, 06:50:15 AM |
|
Thanks for the heads up windpath - done. +1 Thank you
|
Pool.sexy - Pool ETH-ETC-EXP-UBQ-ZEC-DBIX..and more low fee Discussionmy BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
|
|
|
luthermarcus
|
|
February 19, 2016, 06:11:41 AM |
|
I'm still relatively new to Linux how would i go about installing bitcoin core rc5. I probably could figure it out but i dont want to mess anything up in the process. Thanks in advance.
|
Donate Bitcoin 1Mz7ZHxPhoH1ZK2yQvo62NdHvvsS2quhzc Donate TRX TB3WiLEj6iuSBU5tGUKyZkjB4vqrBDvoYM
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
|
|
February 19, 2016, 08:08:15 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 19, 2016, 02:23:14 PM |
|
I'm still relatively new to Linux how would i go about installing bitcoin core rc5. I probably could figure it out but i dont want to mess anything up in the process. Thanks in advance.
0.12.0 has been tagged for release, no need to use the release candidate, I imagine the binaries will be out today if you do want to wait, if not you can build yourself with the directions below. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-unix.md
|
|
|
|
luthermarcus
|
|
February 19, 2016, 03:55:34 PM |
|
I'm still relatively new to Linux how would i go about installing bitcoin core rc5. I probably could figure it out but i dont want to mess anything up in the process. Thanks in advance.
0.12.0 has been tagged for release, no need to use the release candidate, I imagine the binaries will be out today if you do want to wait, if not you can build yourself with the directions below. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-unix.mdThanks windpath for that link and security update too. I just finished building it then i saw your post. It was a good experience for me normally i would stick to windows but bitcoin has me working on lunix. Greatly appreciated.
|
Donate Bitcoin 1Mz7ZHxPhoH1ZK2yQvo62NdHvvsS2quhzc Donate TRX TB3WiLEj6iuSBU5tGUKyZkjB4vqrBDvoYM
|
|
|
luthermarcus
|
|
February 19, 2016, 05:14:13 PM |
|
Does anyone know if the parameter -maxuploadtarget would affect p2pool negatively? From what i read it it used to limit uploads to new bitcoin nodes who are downloading the blockchain. I'm trying to use this as an alternative and/or in combination with -maxconnections parameter.
|
Donate Bitcoin 1Mz7ZHxPhoH1ZK2yQvo62NdHvvsS2quhzc Donate TRX TB3WiLEj6iuSBU5tGUKyZkjB4vqrBDvoYM
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 19, 2016, 05:18:15 PM |
|
Does anyone know if the parameter -maxuploadtarget would affect p2pool negatively? From what i read it it used to limit uploads to new bitcoin nodes who are downloading the blockchain. I'm trying to use this as an alternative and/or in combination with -maxconnections parameter.
It should have no effect, it's a Bitcoin setting and unrelated to P2Pool P2P traffic. FWIW I set -maxconnections to 15 for Bitcoin and 25 for P2Pool
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
|
February 19, 2016, 09:44:58 PM |
|
Running Core v0.12 I got loads or these errors: 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831105 > Error while processing Event callbacks: 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831211 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831237 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 74, in set 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831263 > self.changed.happened(value) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831287 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 42, in happened 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831311 > func(*event) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831335 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/node.py", line 243, in _ 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831360 > self.mining_txs_var.set(new_mining_txs) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831383 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 75, in set 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831410 > self.transitioned.happened(oldvalue, value) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831434 > --- <exception caught here> --- 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831457 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 42, in happened 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831481 > func(*event) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831505 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/p2p.py", line 211, in update_remote_view_of_my_mining_txs 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831541 > assert self.remote_remembered_txs_size <= self.max_remembered_txs_size 2016-02-19 17:55:11.831565 > exceptions.AssertionError: 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833002 > Error while processing Event callbacks: 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833105 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833132 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 74, in set 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833157 > self.changed.happened(value) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833182 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 42, in happened 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833206 > func(*event) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833230 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/node.py", line 243, in _ 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833257 > self.mining_txs_var.set(new_mining_txs) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833280 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 75, in set 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833304 > self.transitioned.happened(oldvalue, value) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833327 > --- <exception caught here> --- 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833351 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/util/variable.py", line 42, in happened 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833374 > func(*event) 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833398 > File "/home/rig/p2pool/p2pool/p2p.py", line 211, in update_remote_view_of_my_mining_txs 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833421 > assert self.remote_remembered_txs_size <= self.max_remembered_txs_size 2016-02-19 17:55:11.833445 > exceptions.AssertionError: ...& my DOA/Orphan rate was quite high - anyone else experience this? Since going back to the previous master branch the errors have gone & my DOA/Orphan rate is fine again.
|
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 19, 2016, 10:28:13 PM |
|
Running Core v0.12 I got loads or these errors:
...
...& my DOA/Orphan rate was quite high - anyone else experience this?
Since going back to the previous master branch the errors have gone & my DOA/Orphan rate is fine again.
I've been running 12 for a couple weeks, been working great, perhaps clean out your P2Pool /data/Bitcoin directory and get a fresh share chain?
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
|
February 19, 2016, 11:05:23 PM |
|
Think I'll wait until the official release & try again, I hate re-downloading the sharechain....lol It's running nice again now, so I'll let it ride.
Did you use the binary or compile from the 0.12 branch? (which is what I did btw)
|
|
|
|
jtoomim
|
|
February 19, 2016, 11:35:15 PM |
|
There appears to be an issue with p2pool producing lots of orphaned shares if the blocksize is greater than about 750 kB. This is caused by the limit on the number of transactions per share being too low. https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/274As Bitcoin Classic sets the default block size limit to the largest allowed by the consensus rules, this can result in Bitcoin Classic nodes failing to produce valid shares. Consequently, if you run Bitcoin Classic with p2pool, you should use blockmaxsize=750000 or lower in your ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf.
|
Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power. http://Toom.im
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 20, 2016, 12:09:09 AM |
|
Think I'll wait until the official release & try again, I hate re-downloading the sharechain....lol It's running nice again now, so I'll let it ride.
Did you use the binary or compile from the 0.12 branch? (which is what I did btw)
I complied core rc3 and the classic 12 branch, both run fine with significantly lower getblocktemplate latency... Edit: see jtoomim's comment above, I run at 750000 on my test node so did not test larger
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
|
February 20, 2016, 12:53:09 AM |
|
Think I'll wait until the official release & try again, I hate re-downloading the sharechain....lol It's running nice again now, so I'll let it ride.
Did you use the binary or compile from the 0.12 branch? (which is what I did btw)
I complied core rc3 and the classic 12 branch, both run fine with significantly lower getblocktemplate latency... Edit: see jtoomim's comment above, I run at 750000 on my test node so did not test larger Is it the same problem with Core as well?
|
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
February 20, 2016, 12:54:04 AM |
|
Think I'll wait until the official release & try again, I hate re-downloading the sharechain....lol It's running nice again now, so I'll let it ride.
Did you use the binary or compile from the 0.12 branch? (which is what I did btw)
I complied core rc3 and the classic 12 branch, both run fine with significantly lower getblocktemplate latency... Edit: see jtoomim's comment above, I run at 750000 on my test node so did not test larger Is it the same problem with Core as well? Best way to find out is test it... But I speculate it's the same...
|
|
|
|
-ck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
|
|
February 20, 2016, 01:07:24 AM Last edit: February 20, 2016, 04:00:20 AM by -ck |
|
There appears to be an issue with p2pool producing lots of orphaned shares if the blocksize is greater than about 750 kB. This is caused by the limit on the number of transactions per share being too low. https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/274As Bitcoin Classic sets the default block size limit to the largest allowed by the consensus rules, this can result in Bitcoin Classic nodes failing to produce valid shares. Consequently, if you run Bitcoin Classic with p2pool, you should use blockmaxsize=750000 or lower in your ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf. Hmm... not much good using a fork designed to increase the max blocksize limit if you can't... increase the max blocksize.
|
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel 2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org -ck
|
|
|
|