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

[forrestv]

Can anyone attack me by making my p2pool public? Or any private info leaking through the web interface?
http://bitpoppool.geekgalaxy.com:9332/fee

No, nothing there needs to be private (it does expose your payout address though). The only possible attack is a DoS.

Is this actually sending?
http://bitpoppool.geekgalaxy.com:9332/patron_sendmany/.001

No, you need to run "bitcoind sendmany XXX" to make the transaction. That just creates the output list.

[1713568659]

1713568659

[1713568659]

1713568659

[bitpop]

Last q, even if I explicitly set payout add, i dont have to do a thing to let users successfully use their add as a username?

[forrestv]

Last q, even if I explicitly set payout add, i dont have to do a thing to let users successfully use their add as a username?

Nope, username always overrides the set payout address unless there's a fee set.

[bitpop]

Love you!

Everyone please mine with me and support P2Pool! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68743.0

[ragnard]

Looking at the Web Interface documentation here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool#Web_interface

I see:

/graphs - RRD graphs of past hash rates for pool and local miners. Look for "VIP password" in P2Pool's output when it starts and use that for your miners to get graphs for individual miners.

Also, snooping around in graphs.py, I see references to localminer which appears separate from the localrate graphs. Can we get graphs for each individual miner connected to our p2pool node?  That would be awesome!

I see "Worker password: xxxxxxxxxxxx (only required for generating graphs)" when p2pool starts up.  I used that password as the password for my miners and now I see some rrd files in p2pool/data/bitcoin/.  How do I display those in the web interface?

[ragnard]

Looks like I answered my own question.  I checked out /graphs and now the Local graphs show another line item in a different color for each miner!  That is so cool!

[echris1]

So, I understand variance and all, but is it normal for me to have 3 hour stretches with no p2pool shares found with 2.4 GH/s and expected time to share of 20 minutes?

I have incoming peers, Local hashrate is also about right, local dead on arrival are about 1-2%, efficiency is usually right around 100% or higher.

Is there something off somewhere or is this just variance again?

[Shadow383]

So, I understand variance and all, but is it normal for me to have 3 hour stretches with no p2pool shares found with 2.4 GH/s and expected time to share of 20 minutes?

I have incoming peers, Local hashrate is also about right, local dead on arrival are about 1-2%, efficiency is usually right around 100% or higher.

Is there something off somewhere or is this just variance again?

My node was getting all your luck!
I couldn't run my miners for most of yesterday, but had someone mining on it at about 500Mhash/s for most of the day and they found 6 shares in the time it took me to go for lunch  

In all seriousness though, if what you describe's happened for a few days in a row, I'd be really concerned. If it's one day, meh, probably really bad variance.

[spiccioli]

So, I understand variance and all, but is it normal for me to have 3 hour stretches with no p2pool shares found with 2.4 GH/s and expected time to share of 20 minutes?

I have incoming peers, Local hashrate is also about right, local dead on arrival are about 1-2%, efficiency is usually right around 100% or higher.

Is there something off somewhere or is this just variance again?

My node was getting all your luck!
I couldn't run my miners for most of yesterday, but had someone mining on it at about 500Mhash/s for most of the day and they found 6 shares in the time it took me to go for lunch  

In all seriousness though, if what you describe's happened for a few days in a row, I'd be really concerned. If it's one day, meh, probably really bad variance.

It seems to me that we need some way to mitigate the double variance to which p2pool miners are subject.

We have pool as a whole variance, but also miner variance, for example today my payouts were are lower than those of two days ago even if the pool as a whole has more or less the same hashing power.

So, given that we need high difficulty shares, what stops p2pool from using not what a miner produces in a day, but in a week?

This would require some more storage, maybe some more calcs, but should smooth out miner's variance.

Am I wrong as usual?

spiccioli

[DeathAndTaxes]

So, given that we need high difficulty shares, what stops p2pool from using not what a miner produces in a day, but in a week?

This would require some more storage, maybe some more calcs, but should smooth out miner's variance.

Am I wrong as usual?

spiccioli

No not wrong but:
a) it will require a hard fork
b) it will mean new users see reduced compensation for 7 days until they have the expected # of shares based on their hashing power.

Maybe 72 hours would be a good compromise for "b" but you still have the issue of "a".

[spiccioli]

So, given that we need high difficulty shares, what stops p2pool from using not what a miner produces in a day, but in a week?

This would require some more storage, maybe some more calcs, but should smooth out miner's variance.

Am I wrong as usual?

spiccioli

No not wrong but:
a) it will require a hard fork
b) it will mean new users see reduced compensation for 7 days until they have the expected # of shares based on their hashing power.

Maybe 72 hours would be a good compromise for "b" but you still have the issue of "a".

DAT,

if a hard fork is the cost, I'd pay it.

Having less miner variance would encourage people to switch to p2pool, I think.

spiccioli

[Ente]

A "hard fork" is, practically, just an update to a new version of p2pool. So most miners wont see any problem in that.

And, if we all switch to the new version/chain/fork at the same time, we wouldnt receive less per found block, since we all begin at zero.

New miners joining p2pool would of course cry out "I have 1gh, found three shares, the pool got a block but I only got a few cents, scam!!". If people constantly ask why they dont get paid out even though they found 100 shares [diff 1, that is], start explaining them that it takes days, weeks to have a steady income per block.. ;-)

Anyway, sounds good to me, I would do either way, 24h-averages or 7d-averages.

Ente

[DeathAndTaxes]

Yeah I wasn't saying there were insurmountable just pointing out potential issues.

Someone should ask Meni of any adverse affects of a very long "n" in PPLNS.  That is essentially what we are doing.  I don't know of any conventional pool which has an n that large.  Then again I don't know of any conventional pool with an n of > 1 and currently p2pool has an n of ~4.  There is pretty much nobody who knows more about mining reward systems then Meni.

[spiccioli]

A "hard fork" is, practically, just an update to a new version of p2pool. So most miners wont see any problem in that.

And, if we all switch to the new version/chain/fork at the same time, we wouldnt receive less per found block, since we all begin at zero.

New miners joining p2pool would of course cry out "I have 1gh, found three shares, the pool got a block but I only got a few cents, scam!!". If people constantly ask why they dont get paid out even though they found 100 shares [diff 1, that is], start explaining them that it takes days, weeks to have a steady income per block.. ;-)

Anyway, sounds good to me, I would do either way, 24h-averages or 7d-averages.

Ente

Ente,

I think it is less of a problem knowing that it takes a few days before your payouts reach their correct and stable level than having payouts swinging up and down, and, most of all, being in a personal unlucky period while the pool as a whole is in a lucky one.

spiccioli.

[naima53]

sorry for the stupid question but only I have a reduced speed? and reduced payments ... Usually, it was 0.2 .... 0.24 for the decision and the last 24 hours - 0.15 0.18 .. Why? I restarted the system - the same result. (I have 4 5850 300 \ 850MHz cgminer 2.2.1 flags: -I 8 -g 1 -k phatk -v 2 --submit-stale win7 x64 driver 11.11)
0.2...0.24 is normal speed??
http://blockchain.info/address/1FDAAiy51sQHHRZ6caG2G8aYujnLzsQ2h9

And now speed 1050 instead of 1440  
http://p2pool.info/ "ActiveUsers" - Search in page - "q2h9" = it`s me  

[echris1]

So, I understand variance and all, but is it normal for me to have 3 hour stretches with no p2pool shares found with 2.4 GH/s and expected time to share of 20 minutes?

I have incoming peers, Local hashrate is also about right, local dead on arrival are about 1-2%, efficiency is usually right around 100% or higher.

Is there something off somewhere or is this just variance again?

My node was getting all your luck!
I couldn't run my miners for most of yesterday, but had someone mining on it at about 500Mhash/s for most of the day and they found 6 shares in the time it took me to go for lunch  

In all seriousness though, if what you describe's happened for a few days in a row, I'd be really concerned. If it's one day, meh, probably really bad variance.

It seems to be doing much better today.  I updated bitcoind to .6rc3, git pulled p2pool (done every other day or so anyway), and rebooted.  Steady day of running and shares looking much better, no more gaps.

Payout and forum sig are finally about right (yeah, I know they aren't accurate, but it is right now)

[naima53]

sorry for the stupid question but only I have a reduced speed? and reduced payments ... Usually, it was 0.2 .... 0.24 for the

strange ... rate continues to fall .. 913 have already... I am forced to move to http://bitclockers.com/  

[Gabi]

Don't blame p2pool for your luck.

Menacing "omg i go to bitclockers" won't change anything, there is no pool operator behind p2pool, so your menace is totally useless. P2pool is open and it is not scamming you.

[kano]

Don't blame p2pool for your luck.

Menacing "omg i go to bitclockers" won't change anything, there is no pool operator behind p2pool, so your menace is totally useless. P2pool is open and it is not scamming you.

Yes anyone can easily verify that statement is 99.5% correct

[TheHarbinger]

Don't blame p2pool for your luck.

Menacing "omg i go to bitclockers" won't change anything, there is no pool operator behind p2pool, so your menace is totally useless. P2pool is open and it is not scamming you.

Yes anyone can easily verify that statement is 99.5% correct

Author != operator. Thanks for playing. Here, I'll give you a consolation prize. --give-author 100

Fixed.