CKPOOL - Open source pool/proxy/passthrough/redirector/library in c for Linux

[fudnet]

Does ckpool work as a generic stratum proxy when run in proxy mode (-p) or is this Bitcoin specific? Wondering as I have use to aggregate multiple Scrypt miners, want to use ckpool in proxy mode to override stratum URL as well as auth credentials enmasse for multiple miners. Have compiled and configured as follows:

Run as: ckpool -p -c ckproxy.conf -k

ckproxy.conf:

Code:

{
"proxy" :  [
        {
                "url" : "scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub",
                "auth" : "some_btc_address",
                "pass" : "x"
        },
        {
                "url" : "scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub",
                "auth" : "some_btc_address",
                "pass" : "x"
        }
],
"update_interval" : 30,
"serverurl" : [
        "192.168.2.77:3334",
        "127.0.0.1:3334"
        ],
"mindiff" : 1,
"startdiff" : 1,
"maxdiff" : 0,
"logdir" : "logs",
"loglevel" : "7"
}

Onscreen results are:

Code:

[2017-10-12 23:05:48.118] ckproxy generator starting
[2017-10-12 23:05:48.119] ckproxy connector starting
[2017-10-12 23:05:48.119] ckproxy connector ready
[2017-10-12 23:05:48.119] ckproxy stratifier starting
[2017-10-12 23:05:48.120] ckproxy stratifier ready
[2017-10-12 23:05:48.417] Proxy 0:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub connection established
[2017-10-12 23:05:49.130] Successfully connected to pool 0 scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub as proxy
[2017-10-12 23:05:49.130] ckproxy generator ready
[2017-10-12 23:05:53.367] Proxy 1:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub connection established
[2017-10-12 23:11:45.366] Proxy 0:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub reconnect issue to scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub, dropping existing connection
[2017-10-12 23:11:45.367] Successfully connected to pool 1 scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub as proxy
[2017-10-12 23:11:45.373] Proxy 1:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub reconnect issue to scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub, dropping existing connection
[2017-10-12 23:11:46.374] Successfully connected to pool 0 scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub as proxy
[2017-10-12 23:11:50.367] Proxy 0:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub completed issued reconnection
[2017-10-12 23:11:50.374] Proxy 1:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub completed issued reconnection
[2017-10-12 23:14:01.141] Proxy 1:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub failed, attempting reconnect
[2017-10-12 23:14:01.150] Proxy 0:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub reconnect issue to scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub, dropping existing connection
[2017-10-12 23:14:01.202] Proxy 0 reached max clients 1
[2017-10-12 23:14:01.251] Temporarily insufficient proxies to accept more clients
[2017-10-12 23:14:01.251] Failed to provide subscription due to no sdata
[2017-10-12 23:14:06.142] Proxy 1:scrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3333/#xnsub recovered
[2017-10-12 23:15:32.115] - 0.00H/s  0.0 SPS  1 users  1 workers

The hashrate stays at 0H/s, and I see worker connection on pool, but miner shows all rejections/discards, and toggles between alive/dead status.

Thoughts?

[-ck]

Does ckpool work as a generic stratum proxy when run in proxy mode (-p) or is this Bitcoin specific?

Documentation goes to great pains to say it's bitcoin only.

[fudnet]

Well then, that explains it. I guess I assumed Bitcoin mention as generic crypto. 

Any other software you're aware of that does what ckpool does, but for Scrypt or other algorithms?

[wavelengthsf]

The documentation for the proxy says:

Note that the upstream pool needs to be a ckpool for it to scale to large hashrates

Is there any guidance for what is "large" in the hashrate? Would 50 TH/s, for example, be large?

[-ck]

The documentation for the proxy says:

Note that the upstream pool needs to be a ckpool for it to scale to large hashrates

Is there any guidance for what is "large" in the hashrate? Would 50 TH/s, for example, be large?

This is no longer the case. Any pool can be used upstream.

[powrslave]

can I mine with nicehash on here?

[-ck]

can I mine with nicehash on here?

This is the ckpool SOFTWARE thread. You want the ckpool.org or solo.ckpool.org mining pool thread and the answer is yes.

[Mamasita22]

Interestingly, it may actually have been working fine. I got similar errors on 64-bit as well. Issue seemed to be hangups with bitcoind. Adding more RAM and setting bitcoind to properly use the notifier seems to made it all work a lot smoother. Still running it on 64-bit.

[BenHacked]

I'm hoping someone has already encountered this and has a quick answer.  Otherwise I'll do some digging this weekend.  I have set up the ckpool on just a clean local server.  If I'm reading the error correctly, it's the URL in the ckpool.conf file that's throwing the error when trying to bind to stratum port.  I also haven't seen any info on increasing the rcvbufsiz.  TIA.




[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool generator starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool stratifier starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool connector starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.962] Failed to increase rcvbufsiz to 532480, increase rmem_max or start ckpool privileged
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.215] ckpool generator ready
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.215] Connected to bitcoind: localhost:8332
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.287] ckpool stratifier ready[2017-12-08 12:52:06.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:06.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s
[2017-12-08 12:52:11.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:11.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s

[-ck]

I'm hoping someone has already encountered this and has a quick answer.  Otherwise I'll do some digging this weekend.  I have set up the ckpool on just a clean local server.  If I'm reading the error correctly, it's the URL in the ckpool.conf file that's throwing the error when trying to bind to stratum port.  I also haven't seen any info on increasing the rcvbufsiz.  TIA.

Code:

[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool generator starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool stratifier starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.802] ckpool connector starting
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s
[2017-12-08 12:52:01.962] Failed to increase rcvbufsiz to 532480, increase rmem_max or start ckpool privileged
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.215] ckpool generator ready
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.215] Connected to bitcoind: localhost:8332
[2017-12-08 12:52:02.287] ckpool stratifier ready[2017-12-08 12:52:06.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:06.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s
[2017-12-08 12:52:11.803] Failed to bind socket for 192.168.1.46:3333
[2017-12-08 12:52:11.803] Connector failed to bind to socket, retrying in 5s

Assuming you have the correct IP address and you're not trying to bind to a privileged port, usually that means something else is bound to the port already. The rcvbufsiz message tells you what you need to change in your linux config (sysctl.conf). If you're only going to be using ckpool locally it is not needed.

[WBF1]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

[-ck]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

[WBF1]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

is that fork public?

edit: nevermind i found it

[WBF1]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

is that fork public?

edit: nevermind i found it

so, ckpool-splns changes that control the coinbase generation are in stratifier? Is it all documented only in code? or also in a readme somewhere?

[-ck]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

is that fork public?

edit: nevermind i found it

so, ckpool-splns changes that control the coinbase generation are in stratifier? Is it all documented only in code? or also in a readme somewhere?

Only in code. The code was meant only for my pool but I promised the users to make all the code fully open for verification.

[WBF1]

hi ck and kano

sorry to hear about the falling out.

without ckdb, there's no "easy way" to have ckpool set the generation address to the address of the user who finds it, right? And ckdb is still "as-is" in this repo?

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

is that fork public?

edit: nevermind i found it

so, ckpool-splns changes that control the coinbase generation are in stratifier? Is it all documented only in code? or also in a readme somewhere?

Only in code. The code was meant only for my pool but I promised the users to make all the code fully open for verification.

Got it. So if I compile and run the splns fork I can expect it to work like your splns pool @ ckpool.org?

[rldleblanc]

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

Does the SPLNS fork give the block finder a bonus in the block like p2pool does?

[-ck]

That's correct, though there is the ckpool-splns fork which does all the apportioning of reward via coinbase generation without a database, as used on ckpool.org

Does the SPLNS fork give the block finder a bonus in the block like p2pool does?

No. It gives a small bonus for their next block found only. It can be a substantial bonus if they're a very small miner only.

[optiroamru]

Hello,

Than it can be treated?
doindex() ?

[Tue Dec 26 18:52:23.898781 2017] [:error] [pid 7865] [client ip:35162] PHP Fatal error:  Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function doindex() in /home/user/ckpool/pool/page.php:594\nStack trace:\n#0
/home/user/ckpool/pool/page_index.php(7): gopage(Array, NULL, 'doindex', 'index', Array, '', false)\n#1
/home/user/ckpool/pool/base.php(455): show_index(Array, 'index', Array, '', false)\n#2
/home/user/ckpool/pool/prime.php(49): showPage(Array, 'index', Array, '', false)\n#3
/home/user/ckpool/pool/prime.php(117): process(NULL, false, Array)\n#4
/home/user/ckpool/pool/prime.php(128): check()\n#5
/home/user/ckpool/html/index.php(2): include_once('/home/user/ck...')\n#6 {main}\n  thrown in /home/user/ckpool/pool/page.php on line 594

Thank.

[WBF1]

@-ck

I get a segfault with ckpool-splns. It is easily reproducible and so is the fix.

When starting with empty/nonexistant log directories and sock directories, ckpool starts but segfaults as soon as it connects to a bitcoind.

Fix I stumbled upon is to run non-splns ckpool for a bit, then close and run ckpool-splns. No segfaults.

Sorry if this is documented somewhere. Bitbucket seems to have been a mess lately.