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

[cabin]

Yes, with a username like "x/1024+16" it should show up similar to this:

2012-03-06 17:31:12.554000 P2Pool: 17472 shares in chain (11125/17476) Peers: 14 (4 incoming)
2012-03-06 17:31:12.555000 Local: 458MH/s in last 10.0 minutes doa: ~0.0% (0-49%) time to share: 1.8 hours
2012-03-06 17:31:12.555000 Shares: 3 (1, 0) Stale: ~33.3% (6-80%) Efficiency: ~72.1% (22-102%) Pay: 0.040 BTC
2012-03-06 17:31:12.555000 Pool: 289GH/s Stale rate: 7.6% Time to block: 6.2 hours Blocks: 1
2012-03-06 17:31:30.921000 NW: Diff: 16.0 / 1024.0 Block value: 50.049500 BTC 82 transactions
2012-03-06 17:31:40.273000 NW: Diff: 16.0 / 1024.0 Block value: 50.049500 BTC 82 transactions
2012-03-06 17:31:47.031000 NW: Diff: 16.0 / 1024.0 Block value: 50.049500 BTC 82 transactions

does p2pool daemon show anything in output when it is using higher share difficulty.  I tired /1000 and it doesn't seem to have any effect.

[1713260885]

1713260885

[1713260885]

1713260885

[TheHarbinger]

Variance, blah.     What a shitty day.

[ChanceCoats123]

Yupp.

[TravisE]

does p2pool daemon show anything in output when it is using higher share difficulty.  I tired /1000 and it doesn't seem to have any effect.

I bumped it up to somewhere around 0.024-ish in my Litecoin p2pool instance, and the new value was reflected in the "share difficulty" lines of p2pool's output. The expected time-to-share doesn't seem to have (yet?) updated, though.

[forrestv]

does p2pool daemon show anything in output when it is using higher share difficulty.  I tired /1000 and it doesn't seem to have any effect.

I bumped it up to somewhere around 0.024-ish in my Litecoin p2pool instance, and the new value was reflected in the "share difficulty" lines of p2pool's output. The expected time-to-share doesn't seem to have (yet?) updated, though.

It won't. You could have multiple miners connected so the only sane thing to do is display the estimates for the default options.

[TravisE]

Ah, thanks for the explanation. That's good to know.

[Ed]

I'm also getting the    "2012-02-26 02:31:41.256425 >     raise ValueError('old share an hour after switch time')
2012-02-26 02:31:41.256481 > exceptions.ValueError: old share an hour after switch time"    error message

This is normal. Some other people haven't upgraded P2Pool and are messing with the rest..

yee  

.................
Got share hash, requesting! Hash: b4b97d3e
2012-03-07 04:23:07.068000 Sending 1 shares to 74.69.38.251:53478
2012-03-07 04:23:07.070000 RECV shares 010....................
2012-03-07 04:23:07.072000 > Error handling message: (see RECV line)
2012-03-07 04:23:07.073000 > Traceback (most recent call last):
..............

hey man! 74.69.38.25 !
could you please update your pool....it is very restlessly - alot of log errors

[ThiagoCMC]

Hi!

 Since day 27 feb 2012, the patron_sendmany stops working for me... Just now I take notice of it...

 Look:

$ wget -O- http://192.168.10.1:9332/patron_sendmany?total=2.0 | more
--2012-03-06 02:08:05--  http://192.168.1.235:9332/patron_sendmany?total=200
Connecting to 192.168.1.235:9332... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 50 [text/plain]
Saving to: `STDOUT'

100%[===============================================================================================================================>] 50          --.-K/s   in 0s     

2012-03-06 02:08:05 (4.23 MB/s) - written to stdout [50/50]

need total argument. go to patron_sendmany/<TOTAL>


 For both Bitcoin 9332 and Litecoin 9327 I got this...

 Any tip!?

Thanks!
Thiago

Please, someone help me!! How to use patron_sendmany these days?!

[Red Emerald]

Hi!

 Since day 27 feb 2012, the patron_sendmany stops working for me... Just now I take notice of it...

 Look:

$ wget -O- http://192.168.10.1:9332/patron_sendmany?total=2.0 | more
--2012-03-06 02:08:05--  http://192.168.1.235:9332/patron_sendmany?total=200
Connecting to 192.168.1.235:9332... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 50 [text/plain]
Saving to: `STDOUT'

100%[===============================================================================================================================>] 50          --.-K/s   in 0s     

2012-03-06 02:08:05 (4.23 MB/s) - written to stdout [50/50]

need total argument. go to patron_sendmany/<TOTAL>


 For both Bitcoin 9332 and Litecoin 9327 I got this...

 Any tip!?

Thanks!
Thiago

Please, someone help me!! How to use patron_sendmany these days?!

Read the error message

It's "patron_sendmany/<TOTAL>", not "patron_sendmany?total=<TOTAL>"

[Red Emerald]

I was thinking it would be cool if p2pool.info listed how much has been donated as subsidies.  Maybe that could be added into the luck calculation, too.

[ThiagoCMC]

Hi!

 Since day 27 feb 2012, the patron_sendmany stops working for me... Just now I take notice of it...

 Look:

$ wget -O- http://192.168.10.1:9332/patron_sendmany?total=2.0 | more
--2012-03-06 02:08:05--  http://192.168.1.235:9332/patron_sendmany?total=200
Connecting to 192.168.1.235:9332... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 50 [text/plain]
Saving to: `STDOUT'

100%[===============================================================================================================================>] 50          --.-K/s   in 0s      

2012-03-06 02:08:05 (4.23 MB/s) - written to stdout [50/50]

need total argument. go to patron_sendmany/<TOTAL>


 For both Bitcoin 9332 and Litecoin 9327 I got this...

 Any tip!?

Thanks!
Thiago

Please, someone help me!! How to use patron_sendmany these days?!

Read the error message

It's "patron_sendmany/<TOTAL>", not "patron_sendmany?total=<TOTAL>"

Well, I read that and it does not work... Before send this question, I already have tried a lot of ways... No one seems to work.

I already try that:

Code:

usuario@desk:~$ wget -O- http://192.168.10.1:9327/patron_sendmany/total=200.00 | more
--2012-03-07 05:25:18--  http://192.168.1.235:9327/patron_sendmany/total=200.00
Connecting to 192.168.1.235:9327... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 500 Internal Server Error
2012-03-07 05:25:18 ERROR 500: Internal Server Error.

usuario@desk:~$ wget -O- http://192.168.10.1:9327/patron_sendmany/TOTAL=200.00 | more
--2012-03-07 05:25:27--  http://192.168.1.235:9327/patron_sendmany/TOTAL=200.00
Connecting to 192.168.1.235:9327... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 500 Internal Server Error
2012-03-07 05:25:27 ERROR 500: Internal Server Error.

So, how to use patron_sendmany with new version of P2Pool?!

-
 Thiago

[broken]

use it like this:

wget -O- http://192.168.1.235:9327/patron_sendmany/200.00 | more

[ThiagoCMC]

use it like this:

wget -O- http://192.168.1.235:9327/patron_sendmany/200.00 | more

Thank you!! It works!

[DeathAndTaxes]

I was thinking it would be cool if p2pool.info listed how much has been donated as subsidies.  Maybe that could be added into the luck calculation, too.

That is a good idea.  Maybe a separate item.

[twmz]

I was thinking it would be cool if p2pool.info listed how much has been donated as subsidies.  Maybe that could be added into the luck calculation, too.

That is a good idea.  Maybe a separate item.

Just thinking about how I would detect these...  I could look for sendmany transactions that have known addresses in them.  Maybe the donation address is enough? 

To incorporate these into the luck numbers is a little more tricky.  Right now luck is not measuring amount of BTC earned (vs expected), but is measuring things based on hashes.  I'd have to change it to be based on BTC or I'd have to translate subsidies into "hash equivalents".  I'll think about it more after I look at finding a way to identify subsidy payments in the first place.

[wachtwoord]

I was thinking it would be cool if p2pool.info listed how much has been donated as subsidies.  Maybe that could be added into the luck calculation, too.

That is a good idea.  Maybe a separate item.

Just thinking about how I would detect these...  I could look for sendmany transactions that have known addresses in them.  Maybe the donation address is enough? 

To incorporate these into the luck numbers is a little more tricky.  Right now luck is not measuring amount of BTC earned (vs expected), but is measuring things based on hashes.  I'd have to change it to be based on BTC or I'd have to translate subsidies into "hash equivalents".  I'll think about it more after I look at finding a way to identify subsidy payments in the first place.

Yes please separate it because I have been mining since 30th of January with 252Mhz and still have not received any donation. I might just be really unlucky, but in my mind I've written off the donation aspect in my reasoning to move to/stay at p2pool. So I'd like the data in isolation

[trouserless]

I had a question about staleness and efficiency.  I've been mining here a while with about 3.8GH/s and I have noticed that when I start my miners on a fresh instance of p2pool/bitcoind, the stale rate starts at 0% and will climb as high as 20% over the course of a day...additionally the efficiency number will start at 112% or so and trail down to the low 90's sometimes over the same timeframe.  From what I have read here, 10% is the stale target for my instance and the p2pool as well (though it's a bit higher for some reason today) and around 100% efficiency is the target where my instance should hover as well (which might explain my 20% drop in BTC payout vs. traditional pool better than variance).

I'm using the git pull on the 5th or 6th for p2pool and 0.6rc2 for bitcoind on linux.  BAMT 0.5 with cgminer 2.2.7.  I've got threads set to 1 on all miners and intensity seems to run well at 7.

Anything I'm overlooking?

[wachtwoord]

The numbers p2pool reports are inaccurate based on the data it found since you started p2pool. So it will start out on 0% stale rate (it found no stales so far) and above average efficiency (no-one has 0% stales) and will approach the real value more and more if it gets more data.

[Red Emerald]

The numbers p2pool reports are inaccurate based on the data it found since you started p2pool. So it will start out on 0% stale rate (it found no stales so far) and above average efficiency (no-one has 0% stales) and will approach the real value more and more if it gets more data.

But why is he getting 10% stales? The target is 9.  When I was using cgminer, I was getting low 3.

I was going to say lower intensity, but it looks like you did that.  I'm not sure why your stale rate is high.

[wachtwoord]

Variance? He only mines for 1 day (though at a high hash rate) so it might take longer for the numbers to converge.