Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 05:51:17 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 [789] 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2591584 times)
Blue Bear
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 04:59:44 AM
 #15761

Thanks froodocooper

What I see is veqtrus Patch is applied in line 58 of the .\p2pool-master\p2pool\bitcoin\helper.py

Code should read:
         
    work['transactions'] = [x for x in work['transactions'] if x['txid'] == x['hash']] # don't mine segwit txs for now


Xantus

so check if that is in your code...

If not add it ... and see if that works before trying for a rebuild ... cause that is what I am doing ...
According to NIST and ECRYPT II, the cryptographic algorithms used in Bitcoin are expected to be strong until at least 2030. (After that, it will not be too difficult to transition to different algorithms.)
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711648277
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711648277

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711648277
Reply with quote  #2

1711648277
Report to moderator
1711648277
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711648277

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711648277
Reply with quote  #2

1711648277
Report to moderator
1711648277
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711648277

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711648277
Reply with quote  #2

1711648277
Report to moderator
Xantus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 07:19:56 AM
 #15762

thnaks so far,

@blue bear :
i downloaded an direkt exe file zip container, it was compiled and i am not an coder, so i have no idea wath is in lin 58 ;-/

@frodocooper :
i downloaded the scoure code from github named p2pool master. in the helper.py line 58 i see
Code:
work['transactions'] = [x for x in work['transactions'] if x['txid'] == x['hash']] # don't mine segwit txs for now
i need to go away, will activate later my miner too look does it work or not. And i will edit my post later ...

so, p2pool is not mining segwit blocks yet ? Shocked
M8BWNNRFMNdak68c
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 09:43:32 AM
Last edit: August 28, 2017, 09:58:33 AM by M8BWNNRFMNdak68c
 #15763

so i tried https://github.com/jtoomim/p2pool - it worked ( although the invalid share rate was higher, sometimes 100% cpu usage.. )

now i switched back to https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/ . but here the network is only 0.5 PH big ( 3 PH in the other version )

so am i an the wrong network, or are miners just frightened of the transition? will someone join me?

Quote
Pool: 518TH/s Stale rate: 9.1% Expected time to block: 85.2 days
P2Pool: 17358 shares in chain (10809 verified/17362 total) Peers: 23 (16 incoming)
Switchover imminent. Upgraded: 77.655% Threshold: 95.000%
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 10:00:33 AM
 #15764

What is happening is that my code has been checking for segwit transactions to not be included in old shares for months but I haven't included a check in the mining code since I thought that v17 shares would activate before segwit activates. Bitcoind is sending segwit txs in its block template but p2pool can't mine them yet. This has nothing to do with syncing other shares.

https://github.com/veqtrus/p2pool/releases/tag/17.1 if anyone needs windows binaries.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Cryptonomist
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 10:02:24 AM
 #15765

so i tried https://github.com/jtoomim/p2pool - it worked ( although the invalid share rate was higher, sometimes 100% cpu usage.. )

now i switched back to https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/ . but here the network is only 0.5 PH big ( 3 PH in the other version )

so am i an the wrong network, or are miners just frightened of the transition? will soemone join me?

Hello,

The network hash rate for the main branch (forrestv-veqtrus version) is indeed currently only 0.5 PH. It fluctuates a bit throughout the day. Since the split between the jtoomim and main branch the hash power in the main branch has decreased drastically, however, it is now again a bit higher compared to a few days ago. Before the split it was around >2PH on average (this fluctuated also a lot) if I remember it correctly, but even then P2pool was a very small pool.
The reason of the decline (this is just my assessment of the situation) is on the one hand the fact that the network has split, and on the other hand the confusion in the P2pool community during the transition to segWit, and the not so straightforward way (through github) to get the segWit compatible version of P2pool main branch. This has now changed. Forrestv has updated the links on http://p2pool.in/ and veqtrus has merged his segWit compatible p2pool with the main branch on github. I expect that this will result over time in a higher hash rate for the p2pool main branch (I hope).
Blue Bear
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 10:17:04 AM
 #15766

What is happening is that my code has been checking for segwit transactions to not be included in old shares for months but I haven't included a check in the mining code since I thought that v17 shares would activate before segwit activates. Bitcoind is sending segwit txs in its block template but p2pool can't mine them yet. This has nothing to do with syncing other shares.

https://github.com/veqtrus/p2pool/releases/tag/17.1 if anyone needs windows binaries.

Thanks Veqtrus

I have implemented the new code ... still have to wait until my core node finishes rebuilding to try it ...
M8BWNNRFMNdak68c
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 11:10:49 AM
 #15767

so i tried https://github.com/jtoomim/p2pool - it worked ( although the invalid share rate was higher, sometimes 100% cpu usage.. )

now i switched back to https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/ . but here the network is only 0.5 PH big ( 3 PH in the other version )

so am i an the wrong network, or are miners just frightened of the transition? will soemone join me?

Hello,

The network hash rate for the main branch (forrestv-veqtrus version) is indeed currently only 0.5 PH. It fluctuates a bit throughout the day. Since the split between the jtoomim and main branch the hash power in the main branch has decreased drastically, however, it is now again a bit higher compared to a few days ago. Before the split it was around >2PH on average (this fluctuated also a lot) if I remember it correctly, but even then P2pool was a very small pool.
The reason of the decline (this is just my assessment of the situation) is on the one hand the fact that the network has split, and on the other hand the confusion in the P2pool community during the transition to segWit, and the not so straightforward way (through github) to get the segWit compatible version of P2pool main branch. This has now changed. Forrestv has updated the links on http://p2pool.in/ and veqtrus has merged his segWit compatible p2pool with the main branch on github. I expect that this will result over time in a higher hash rate for the p2pool main branch (I hope).
okay thank you.. is there a possibility to combine the two branches again? it seems to be very uselesss to split this very small pool in two even smaller, separate networks..
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 11:23:48 AM
 #15768

okay thank you.. is there a possibility to combine the two branches again? it seems to be very uselesss to split this very small pool in two even smaller, separate networks..
In 3 months jtoomimnet will fork off to segwit2x anyway so it seems to be pointless.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Cryptonomist
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 11:57:26 AM
 #15769

okay thank you.. is there a possibility to combine the two branches again? it seems to be very uselesss to split this very small pool in two even smaller, separate networks..
In 3 months jtoomimnet will fork off to segwit2x anyway so it seems to be pointless.

Ok that is true, however I believe that jtoomim is planning to let his chain automatically split in 3 months. One part would be following segwit2x, and the other part segwit. In that case it is still possible to end up with two separate P2pool networks that actually follow the same Bitcoin rules. It depends all on how much miners are following jtoomim but do not support segwit2x. To be honest I have no idea how many people are in that case. Also, I don't know if jtoomim is still working on this automatic split.

Just a hypothetical question (I'm not yet far enough in understanding the code, so this might be gibberish): In case the split of jtoomim's network happens, would it not be possible to merge the two versions that follow segwit, so that the reasons that some miners have to follow jtoomim even though they only support segwit is partially alleviated?
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 12:25:04 PM
 #15770

okay thank you.. is there a possibility to combine the two branches again? it seems to be very uselesss to split this very small pool in two even smaller, separate networks..
In 3 months jtoomimnet will fork off to segwit2x anyway so it seems to be pointless.
In case the split of jtoomim's network happens, would it not be possible to merge the two versions that follow segwit, so that the reasons that some miners have to follow jtoomim even though they only support segwit is partially alleviated?
Merging would require creating a third network which contains a snapshot of the balances of the other two networks. It's easier to just abandon one of the networks.

I think one of the main reasons people choose to use jtoomimnet is the excessively increased new txn size/share limit which allows producing larger blocks at the expense of DoS vulnerability. Since a lot of "P2Pool miners" are just mining on centralized P2Pool instances this isn't a concern to them; they can switch to any other centralized pool at any time. Also since proof-of-hope blockchains are the domain of BU/2x/altcoin developers this represents a major disagreement.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Xantus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 01:39:22 PM
 #15771

now idea wath you people talking about  Roll Eyes but thanks für Windows 17.1 and thanks for updatin the links on p2pool.in.

I also would also like to see that all the p2pool miners go back to one and the same chain. and hoping that the next update will unite all of us to strengthen us pool.
by the way, i am back online  Smiley
frodocooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 351
Merit: 410


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 02:23:21 PM
Last edit: August 28, 2017, 11:33:36 PM by frodocooper
 #15772

I think one of the main reasons people choose to use jtoomimnet is the excessively increased new txn size/share limit which allows producing larger blocks at the expense of DoS vulnerability.

It's not excessive when the new transaction size per share limit is pegged to the Bitcoin network's block size limit. And it should be pegged to the Bitcoin network's limit.

There have been many instances of Bitcoin blocks being found within seconds of each other. One such example is this recent block by ckpool.org that was found a mere 19 seconds after the previous block, which incidentally is well below P2Pool's share interval of 30 seconds. If a mainnet P2Pool miner were to have found ckpool.org's block, that block would have had only a little more than 100 kB of transactions in it, because there was only time for one P2Pool share to be found, and so only 100 kB of new transactions plus whatever transactions can be found in the sharechain that weren't already used by Bitcoin after the most recent block, within that share. As it is, ckpool.org, without such an arbitrary limit, mined a block that was 918.59 kB in size and 3,674.12 kWU in weight, even after only 19 seconds from the previous block.

To put it simply, with mainnet P2Pool's limit of 100 kB of new transactions per share and with each share taking approximately 30 seconds to find, it would have to take mainnet P2Pool around five minutes to mine a full 1 MB block.

Not only are you shooting yourselves in both feet with this artificial limit (in terms of deliberately limiting how much transaction fees you would earn from blocks found in less than five minutes), but you are also intentionally placing a bottleneck in Bitcoin's transaction-confirmation process (and doing the Bitcoin network a great disservice) by intentionally not mining full blocks when you could have.

(Do not confuse full with big here, lest you accuse me of being a so-called "big-blocker." I support, and intend to continue to support, the Bitcoin Core chain.)

Edit: The third sentence in the second paragraph has been amended from "and so only 100 kB of new transactions and whatever that was left from mainnet P2Pool's 2.5 MB mempool after the previous block was found, within that share" to "and so only 100 kB of new transactions plus whatever transactions can be found in the sharechain that weren't already used by Bitcoin after the most recent block, within that share" to more accurately explain P2Pool's current working design.
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 02:32:51 PM
 #15773

There have been many instances of Bitcoin blocks being found within seconds of each other.
That doesn't mean that Bitcoin's target block time could be reduced to 30 seconds and is no reason P2Pool's shares could be 1MB.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
frodocooper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 351
Merit: 410


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 03:04:45 PM
Last edit: August 28, 2017, 03:20:37 PM by frodocooper
 #15774

That doesn't mean that Bitcoin's target block time could be reduced to 30 seconds and is no reason P2Pool's shares could be 1MB.

You're missing the point. Bitcoin's target of 10 minutes per block is not a definite interval (where blocks can only be found precisely within 10 minutes of each other) but a probabilistic one (where blocks are to be found within 10 minutes on average). As with all things probability-related, there are always outliers. In Bitcoin's case, such outliers (i.e., blocks that have been found within seconds of each other) have been rather common. The decision to limit mainnet P2Pool's share size limit to an arbitrary value that's lower than what the Bitcoin network demands is a decision to completely disregard these (common) outliers. You therefore deliberately harm yourselves (intentionally limiting your earnings from transaction fees) and the Bitcoin network (intentionally being a bottleneck in Bitcoin's transaction confirmation process) by disregarding the very real and statistically significant probability of blocks being found in less than five minutes.

In other words, you are deliberately choosing to not take into account the inherent element of chance in the mining of each and every Bitcoin block. There is absolutely no guarantee that the next P2Pool block would be found only after five minutes from the previous block. There is always a statistically significant chance (albeit a small one) that the next mainnet P2Pool block would be found in less than five minutes after the previous block, due to how Bitcoin mining inherently relies on chance. Again, you not only deliberately limit your potential earnings within the first five minutes after each new block, but also deliberately become a bottleneck in the Bitcoin network's transaction confirmation process within those five minutes, acting against your own interests and the interests of the Bitcoin network.
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011



View Profile
August 28, 2017, 03:41:59 PM
 #15775

and, please, flush the SHARES files in the data folder, bitcoin folder in the P2Pool install directory (when you switch from v16 to v17).  Wink

sawa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1308
Merit: 1011



View Profile
August 28, 2017, 03:45:12 PM
 #15776

I've moved ports of BTC pools on my server. Miners, check what you are mining, refresh the page on the BTC pool tabs and move asics to the network you need.

http://crypto.mine.nu:9334  - BTC(1% fee, jtoomimnet)
Currently hashrate: Local rate: 62.29 TH/s (DOA 4.79 TH/s / 7.68%)
The resources used by the node (the moments of the maximum CPU load):


http://crypto.mine.nu:9330 - BTC(0% fee, jtoomimnet)
Currently hashrate: Local rate: 0.00 H/s
The resources used by the node (the moments of the maximum CPU load):


http://crypto.mine.nu:9332 - BTC(0% fee, ForrestVnet)
Currently hashrate: Local rate: 3.11 TH/s (DOA 214.18 GH/s / 6.88%)
The resources used by the node (the moments of the maximum CPU load):


CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Eight-Core Processor
For both jtoomimnet nodes one processor core is allocated.
Another one core works completely for ForrestVnet node.

crypto.mine.nu and crypto.office-on-the.net are different names of the same server with different Internet channels

veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 03:47:45 PM
 #15777

flush the SHARES files
What do you mean?

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 03:50:32 PM
 #15778

As with all things probability-related, there are always outliers.
By reducing the target block interval you make those outliers the new average. The new outliers will be just a few seconds.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Blue Bear
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 28, 2017, 04:48:39 PM
 #15779

flush the SHARES files
What do you mean?
delete the share files in the folder
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2017, 04:58:47 PM
 #15780

flush the SHARES files
What do you mean?
delete the share files in the folder
Why would that be needed?

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Pages: « 1 ... 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 [789] 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 »
  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!