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

[PatMan]

Hello, Mr Forrestv
      I represent P2POOL Chinese users thank you, thank you always hard to pay, we have been using a 1% donation to express our gratitude.
But in December 2013, P2POOL encountered a problem, bitcoin difficulty of continued growth in, small miners can only choose to leave.
I have tried to contact you, try to communicate. I hope you can solve some problems, but you disappeared.
P2POOL income has been declining, we have suspended the donation. 2014 we did not donate, because you do not continue to work for P2POOL, up to eight months.
P2POOL 2013 in December, creating a very good income. April 23, 2014, I took my Chinese friends, try to P2POOL impetus,
We have assembled a force of about 250T count P2POOL, until June 20, 2014. We are their own servers, non-profit pools, revenue is not good, you're better than that
We know, we have no reason to donate to you. We continuous losses, still insist on P2POOL mining BTC.
We are very sad, so June 20 we left P2POOL. You are very lucky to have a count of about 300T of unknown force mining in P2POOL, they also have a lot of 0 donations
Did you say they are hypocrites? ? ? If they leave, you will lose your time and effort spent countless while building P2POOL, P2POOL will collapse.
Your time is limited, miner's time is limited. We should understand each other.
I saw the June 22 and 27, have updated and P2POOL again， shown remarkable performance gains, if these updates are really effective to improve the income,In July I will return to the set count force P2POOL, and consider donating. But if the performance is still so poor, we do not need to return to P2POOL.

Well said. And yes, he did.

Good news is that Bitmain have told me their engineers are working on improving the p2pool issue - but don't hold your breath.

"Bitfury systems are not compatible with p2pool."

Well there's a surprise......

[1713989147]

1713989147

[1713989147]

1713989147

[1713989147]

1713989147

[windpath]

"These are the results of the survey. 68% of all unit holders have cast their vote:

- Yes, PetaMine should switch over to P2Pool – 96%
- No, PetaMine should stay with ghash.io – 3%
- No, Petamine should switch to another pool like Eligius or BTCGuild – 1%

The result is clear that a big majority of unit holders prefer a switch to p2pool. As we were performing additional tests the past week, we have to inform you that unfortunately the Bitfury systems are not compatible with p2pool. We are currently working on a solution for this and we will switch to p2pool as soon as we are able to fix this problem."

Sharedifficulty rising..  

I cant wait to see if Peta makes more coins with p2pool then before...

This is great news, PETAMINE will add a nice boost to block frequency...

If the PETAMINE folks are around, happy to provide a front end for your node(s)

[IYFTech]

"Bitfury systems are not compatible with p2pool."

I could have told them that over a year ago.....

If, however, they do manage to find a way to use their hardware with p2pool then they will have done something that forrestv has failed to do & should be given his bounty 

[windpath]

"Bitfury systems are not compatible with p2pool."

I could have told them that over a year ago.....

If, however, they do manage to find a way to use their hardware with p2pool then they will have done something that forrestv has failed to do & should be given his bounty 

The bounty I set up is not for Bitfury equipment, it is specifically for Antminer S2 and S3, however I imagine a bounty from the Bitfury folks might get Forrest involved.

[phillipsjk]

"Bitfury systems are not compatible with p2pool."

I could have told them that over a year ago.....

If, however, they do manage to find a way to use their hardware with p2pool then they will have done something that forrestv has failed to do & should be given his bounty  

The bounty I set up is not for Bitfury equipment, it is specifically for Antminer S2 and S3, however I imagine a bounty from the Bitfury folks might get Forrest involved.

I suspect making P2Pool work with proxies will fix both.

I notice the bounty is specifically for forestv though, and not other contributors.

I am also leery about sending funds to some random guy on the Internet too

[IYFTech]

So, on top of donations to forrestv, you're offering a bounty only to him as well, for something that should have been sorted out over a year ago. In the meantime, if anyone else finds a fix - they get nothing.

Yeah, that'll work.

[windpath]

I suspect making P2Pool work with proxies will fix both.

I notice the bounty is specifically for forestv though, and not other contributors.

I am also leery about sending funds to some random guy on the Internet too

The bounty is for Forrest or his designee, my goal here guys is to create a reward based system for Forrest that provides financial incentives for him to get back into development of p2pool outside of a donation % from mining.

While I may appear to be "some random guy" I hope the work I've done so far on the front end has demonstrated some level of commitment to p2pools success. I'm a real person, and plan to stick around, trust has to start somewhere, phillip if you contribute some coin you have my word it will either go to Forrest if the Ants work by July 25th, or will be returned to you. Yes, it's a risk, and my intent is to build some trust for future bounties, not to make off with anyone's Bitcoins

[mdude77]

I suspect making P2Pool work with proxies will fix both.

I notice the bounty is specifically for forestv though, and not other contributors.

I am also leery about sending funds to some random guy on the Internet too

The bounty is for Forrest or his designee, my goal here guys is to create a reward based system for Forrest that provides financial incentives for him to get back into development of p2pool outside of a donation % from mining.

While I may appear to be "some random guy" I hope the work I've done so far on the front end has demonstrated some level of commitment to p2pools success. I'm a real person, and plan to stick around, trust has to start somewhere, phillip if you contribute some coin you have my word it will either go to Forrest if the Ants work by July 25th, or will be returned to you. Yes, it's a risk, and my intent is to build some trust for future bounties, not to make off with anyone's Bitcoins

I tend to agree with others... the bounty should be available to anyone who comes up with a working solution.  Not just Forrest.

M

[raskul]

I suspect making P2Pool work with proxies will fix both.

I notice the bounty is specifically for forestv though, and not other contributors.

I am also leery about sending funds to some random guy on the Internet too

The bounty is for Forrest or his designee, my goal here guys is to create a reward based system for Forrest that provides financial incentives for him to get back into development of p2pool outside of a donation % from mining.

While I may appear to be "some random guy" I hope the work I've done so far on the front end has demonstrated some level of commitment to p2pools success. I'm a real person, and plan to stick around, trust has to start somewhere, phillip if you contribute some coin you have my word it will either go to Forrest if the Ants work by July 25th, or will be returned to you. Yes, it's a risk, and my intent is to build some trust for future bounties, not to make off with anyone's Bitcoins

I tend to agree with others... the bounty should be available to anyone who comes up with a working solution.  Not just Forrest.

M

totally agree, don't like the tone of forrestv's recent messages (although I do agree that developers should be rewarded).
forrestv seems to think the word 'donation' means something other than it's meaning;

A donation is a gift...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation

[cathoderay]

I tend to agree with others... the bounty should be available to anyone who comes up with a working solution.  Not just Forrest.

M

Absolutely. From what I can gather, p2poolers have spent over a year waiting for forrestv to tackle these issues, all the while collecting donations, but doing nothing. We are where we are now because forrestv went AWOL, as our Chinese friends with 250Th so rightly pointed out.

Forget about forrestv, it won't happen. Offer the bounty to anyone who can help get p2pool back to where it belongs. The payment for him adding TRC was obviously more than the bounty being offered anyway.....

But hey, what do we know - we're all hypocrites.

[windpath]

I tend to agree with others... the bounty should be available to anyone who comes up with a working solution.  Not just Forrest.

M

Again, the my goal is really to create an incentive for forrest to get involved again, I established the bounty based on that, and changing it now after it has started is not something I'm going to do...

The bounty was established for Forrest or his designee, maybe another dev wants to jump in and work with him on it?

That being said, I agree that if Forrest does not get involved any future bounty I set up will be open to all with well established criteria for completion.

This bounty expires July 25th and will be paid to Forrest (or his designee) or returned to donators...

Bounty Address: 1Ft1DZ4EcpH1jFttDoPwsFbe11a6diyZ1H

https://blockchain.info/address/1Ft1DZ4EcpH1jFttDoPwsFbe11a6diyZ1H

Signed message:

Code:

forrestv p2pool antminer s2 and s3 compatibility fix.

Message signature:

Code:

G7zuvJ7/LPv7LpZveAsQWet1gAR42bnwFRVPB7NsnGqPnWkN8bqSSN1UwR+NnfDs/8LkruqZcVsTTdfcy5pcNj4=

If you would like to see a working solution for the new Ants from Forrest please contribute and show that we are willing to pay for work completed.

[xyzzy099]

Again, the my goal is really to create an incentive for forrest to get involved again

I don't think Forrest has been uninvolved because of a lack of donations - I think he has been 'uninvolved' because he simply doesn't know how to fix the problems that need fixing.

He pretty much said as much in his last little diatribe.  Yeah, he hinted at a 'possible breakthrough' in a rather obvious attempt to milk some donation money, but I think you are just throwing bad money after good if you send him any more donations.

[raskul]

good to see some heavy hashpoer returning to p2pool tonight - lets hope they stick with us 

[windpath]

I think you are just throwing bad money after good if you send him any more donations.

The bounty will only be paid if the new Ants are playing well with p2pool by July 25th, otherwise it will be returned to donators...

[windpath]

good to see some heavy hashpoer returning to p2pool tonight - lets hope they stick with us  

Looks like some may have already arrived

[norgan]

Of course they are back, the gravy train is in town. I welcome them but question their motives and logic.

[raskul]

well, that was short lived   200TH/s of failovers?

[sconklin321]

Of course they are back, the gravy train is in town. I welcome them but question their motives and logic.

I hope the gravy train continues.  I finally got enough hashing power on June 19 to start mining on p2pool and generate at least 1 share a day, and I'm at 319% of a normal free pool because a day or two before our recent string of luck started, my miner's got super lucky on solving shares.

On the development of P2Pool note, I'm really hoping the problem with the S2s, and potentially the S3s get worked out.  I'm debating dropping money on getting an S3 or and RK-box and I'm currently leaning S3, but all that can changed depending on price.  I really would like to keep that kinda hashing power decentralized and contribute it to P2Pool, but if the pool won't support, I'll have to look elsewhere.  If we can't get this working with the existing bounty by its deadline, I'm definitely willing to contribute to an open bounty to Fork P2Pool get it working.  As far as the pool scaling better with increased hashing power, wouldn't a possible temporary solution, bandage if you will, be to lower the share time.  Say set the share to time 15 or 10 seconds, or would that just create too much dust???

[andmax]

I have a question, I have setup 2 nodes one has my S1's hooked to it and the other has my S2's attached to it, they seem to hash a lot better doing it that way. If I have them all on the same node my total hashing power decreases, will the slower hashing of the S1's bring down the S2 hashing rate or does it make no difference? Are there any pros or cons of running 2 nodes?

[mdude77]

I have a question, I have setup 2 nodes one has my S1's hooked to it and the other has my S2's attached to it, they seem to hash a lot better doing it that way. If I have them all on the same node my total hashing power decreases, will the slower hashing of the S1's bring down the S2 hashing rate or does it make no difference? Are there any pros or cons of running 2 nodes?

One node should be able to handle both.  There are known problems with S2s working on p2pool.  But if you found a way to get it to work, do share.

M