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

[IYFTech]

They're ignoring it, have been since day one.

I really think their p2pool support is lipservice, nothing more.

M

You got that right mdude. They're marketing the "decentralization" thing really hard too, even though it completely isn't. I've always given them the benefit of doubt, especially with their p2pool crap, but I've completely lost faith in them lately......

[PatMan]

They're ignoring it, have been since day one.

I really think their p2pool support is lipservice, nothing more.

M

You got that right mdude. They're marketing the "decentralization" thing really hard too, even though it completely isn't. I've always given them the benefit of doubt, especially with their p2pool crap, but I've completely lost faith in them lately......

Same here, I'm in the process of clearing out my Bitmain gear for SP-Tech stuff - it's better & it works a treat with p2pool. Their support is superior too, far superior.

Seems like we're back to where we were 18 months ago, lack of compatible hardware & no development......we need a re-write!! 

[mdude77]

They're ignoring it, have been since day one.

I really think their p2pool support is lipservice, nothing more.

M

You got that right mdude. They're marketing the "decentralization" thing really hard too, even though it completely isn't. I've always given them the benefit of doubt, especially with their p2pool crap, but I've completely lost faith in them lately......

Same here, I'm in the process of clearing out my Bitmain gear for SP-Tech stuff - it's better & it works a treat with p2pool. Their support is superior too, far superior.

Seems like we're back to where we were 18 months ago, lack of compatible hardware & no development......we need a re-write!! 

I'm keeping an S2, S3, and C1 for support in my app.  The proceeds from selling my other Ants went to buying a SP20.  The intent is to add support to my monitor for that too.

M

[PatMan]

Same here, I'm in the process of clearing out my Bitmain gear for SP-Tech stuff - it's better & it works a treat with p2pool. Their support is superior too, far superior.

Seems like we're back to where we were 18 months ago, lack of compatible hardware & no development......we need a re-write!! 

I'm keeping an S2, S3, and C1 for support in my app.  The proceeds from selling my other Ants went to buying a SP20.  The intent is to add support to my monitor for that too.

M

Those SP20 are a good piece of kit, I'm well happy with mine. Got one more S2 to sell (my best one  ), then I'll be getting rid of the S3's gradually. I never bothered with the S4 or C1 - too much grief & lack of support, best decision I made too. Interested to see support in your app for the SP20 mdude - cool 

[IYFTech]

Agreed on those SP20's - and to think I nearly bought a Prisma........that was close 

[mdude77]

Agreed on those SP20's - and to think I nearly bought a Prisma........that was close 

The only thing I saw good about the Prisma was the price war it caused.  Otherwise ... not able to use low starting difficulty, power usage changes with ambient temp.. and needs a separate controller?

I'm hoping the SP20 doesn't disappoint.

M

[IYFTech]

Agreed on those SP20's - and to think I nearly bought a Prisma........that was close  

The only thing I saw good about the Prisma was the price war it caused.  Otherwise ... not able to use low starting difficulty, power usage changes with ambient temp.. and needs a separate controller?

I'm hoping the SP20 doesn't disappoint.

M

Yeah, I read some real horror stories about them, zero support too - which seems to be a blossoming problem lately......

You'll not be disappointed with the SP20 though  

Edit: Although ambient temp plays a major role with the SP20 also - it likes to be c-c-c-cold 

[IYFTech]

Anyone have a C1 pointing at p2pool?  Mine seems to behave like my S2 pre-fix ... abysmal.

I was expecting the C1 to act like a S3, but it doesn't, it acts like an S2.  Including the annoying "have to set queue to 0 every reboot" problem.

M

I have C1's using P2Pool.  Mine are getting the full 1000GH/s, but they do require the same re-setting of queue after a reboot.  I also set the pseudo share difficulty.  It has been discussed that setting pseudo difficulty does not effect the overall performance, however setting pseudo difficulty will make cgminer and the UI show the expected hashrate.  I use +1028 (If you use +1024, Best Share is not displayed.  But with +1028, best Share works.  I have no idea why.)  Regarding setting the queue, S2/S4/C1 all have the same OS configuration.

I'm not sure if it also gets wiped after a reboot (I'll let you know the next time I have to reboot) but I found that the "save and apply" button on the miner configuration completely re-writes cgminer.conf on my C1s.  I've edited /www/pages/cgi-bin/set_miner_conf.cgi to add the options so that I can fiddle with my settings in the gui and still maintain the configs...

That's pretty annoying about the stale shares filtering, have they made any comment regarding that specifcally or are they just ignoring it?

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

[-ck]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

[IYFTech]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

Blimey - that was quick!! 

[norgan]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

Are the S3 binaries still needed with the latest firmware? I'm getting ~4% rejected and ~1.5% stale on my S3's with p2pool

EDIT: is there an S3 binary from Kano??

[IYFTech]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

Are the S3 binaries still needed with the latest firmware? I'm getting ~4% rejected and ~1.5% stale on my S3's with p2pool

Yes, I use it with the latest firmware:

http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s3/4.6.1-141020/cgminer

[-ck]

Yes and your rejects and stale may actually go up, but you want that since you've already mined those shares anyway and they might solve a block.

[norgan]

Yes and your rejects and stale may actually go up, but you want that since you've already mined those shares anyway and they might solve a block.

Thanks will give it a go. (FYI I was looking at Kano's binaries not Cons lol)

[mdude77]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

You'd think it's a S3 on steroids.  But it's not.  It's more like an S2 in every way except the physical size and power usage.  Same file system, same different passwords, same annoying "features".

M

[entr04y]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

Doesn't look like it:

Code:

root@ant1:~# /usr/bin/cgminer --help
/usr/bin/cgminer: line 1: syntax error: unexpected "("

$ file cgminer
cgminer: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, MIPS, MIPS32 rel2 version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), with unknown capability 0x41000000 = 0xf676e75, with unknown capability 0x10000 = 0x70403, stripped

$ file cgminer.orig
cgminer.orig: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped

cgminer.orig  is the one that came with the c1.

[mahrens917]

> Error submitting primary block: (will retry)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269638 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269676 >   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 490, in _startRunCallbacks
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269704 >     self._runCallbacks()
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269738 >   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 577, in _runCallbacks
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269780 >     current.result = callback(current.result, *args, **kw)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269832 >   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1155, in gotResult
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269856 >     _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269880 >   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/defer.py", line 1099, in _inlineCallbacks
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269913 >     result = g.send(result)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269954 > --- <exception caught here> ---
2014-12-01 08:58:52.269987 >   File "/mnt/60gb/p2pool/p2pool/util/deferral.py", line 41, in f
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270028 >     result = yield func(*args, **kwargs)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270059 >   File "/mnt/60gb/p2pool/p2pool/bitcoin/helper.py", line 67, in submit_block_p2p
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270112 >     factory.conn.value.send_block(block=block)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270136 >   File "/mnt/60gb/p2pool/p2pool/util/p2protocol.py", line 102, in <lambda>
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270169 >     return lambda **payload2: self.sendPacket(command, payload2)
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270201 >   File "/mnt/60gb/p2pool/p2pool/util/p2protocol.py", line 93, in sendPacket
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270224 >     raise TooLong('payload too long')
2014-12-01 08:58:52.270247 > p2pool.util.p2protocol.TooLong: payload too long

Whatsup?


It became orphan because payload too long? Too many users on pool or too many transactions in a block or what?

I received the same error as well at around the same time.  I will post it on github if anyone hasn't already.

[mahrens917]

The latest algorithm change definitely boosted my node's standing (currently 112% score in your list).

Could you change the listing from the IP  71.172.92.76 to the host name galactica.geekgalaxy.com?

Also, the algorithm FAQ at the bottom still lists GWL.

I changed your hostname and updated the FAQ on the bottom of the page.  You should be all set now. 

Note, that your score is relative to your location so 112% for you in NJ will be (slightly) different for me in NY.

[mahrens917]

2014-12-01 08:58:52.270247 > p2pool.util.p2protocol.TooLong: payload too long

Whatsup?


It became orphan because payload too long? Too many users on pool or too many transactions in a block or what?

I received the same error as well at around the same time.  I will post it on github if anyone hasn't already.

I posted the issue here https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/issues/238 so others can update as well.

Did this happen to anyone else?

[entr04y]

Might be worth while asking ckolivas if the S3 binary he done to fix the stale shares filtering can also be used in the C1? I don't have a C1, but it might be compatible......

If S3 binaries run on the C1, my binary is compatible.

Doesn't look like it:

Code:

root@ant1:~# /usr/bin/cgminer --help
/usr/bin/cgminer: line 1: syntax error: unexpected "("

$ file cgminer
cgminer: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, MIPS, MIPS32 rel2 version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), with unknown capability 0x41000000 = 0xf676e75, with unknown capability 0x10000 = 0x70403, stripped

$ file cgminer.orig
cgminer.orig: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped

cgminer.orig  is the one that came with the c1.

The S4 binary seems to run ok (actually it seems to give quite a boost in hash rate), but the GH/s (5s) field is 0 (the avg field looks right) and the discarded field is really high... p2pool says 1.34THS/s and 5.5% discard rate, and the temperature seemed stable.  I've switched back to the original binary for now... it seems like it was running too fast and if the GH/s field isn't working, I'm not sure that I trust the rest of the stats on the miner.

ckolivas (or anyone else), any opinion on running the s4 binary on a c1?