NastyPoP vs Standard P2Pool

[jonnybravo0311]

Yet another week has passed.  P2Pool started off strong, but has stalled for the past 3.5 days.  Luck shows just over 100% for the past 7 days.  Here are this week's results:

2/20 - 2/27
NastyPoP - 0.03798674BTC
NastyP2P - 0.04202049BTC
Expected - 0.0338BTC
Luck - 100.64%

Updated the OP

[jonnybravo0311]

Another lousy luck week for p2pool in general - 7 day luck shows 51.98%.  2 blocks found.  My S3 running with p2pool payouts was all over the board during the week at one point expecting to get nearly 0.02BTC if a block were found... to 0.003BTC per block.  Unfortunately, when the blocks were found, it had fewer than expected shares on the chain and the results suffer for it.  My S3 running with NastyPoP actually made more than I thought it would.  Here are the week's results:

2/27 - 3/6
NastyPoP - 0.02048889BTC
NastyP2P - 0.00942830BTC
Expected - 0.0332BTC
Luck - 51.98%

OP updated.

[jonnybravo0311]

Well, p2pool had a good week, and payouts from both NastyPoP and NastyP2P reflected that, each beating expectations.  NastyP2P managed to edge out NastyPoP, but the difference between the two is only 0.00770503BTC.

3/6 - 3/13
NastyPoP - 0.05138458BTC
NastyP2P - 0.05908961BTC
Expected - 0.0328BTC
Luck - 131.5%

OP updated.

[jonnybravo0311]

Another week has passed.  P2Pool had just over 100% luck for the seven days, and you can see the NastyPoP payout was very close to the 101.66% of expectations.  The S3 running on the standard node did a bit better, as it had a nice lucky streak right before the block was found yesterday.

In other news, TheAnalogKid has opened up a US node for OgNasty that runs both the standard NastyP2P as well as the NastyPoP payouts.  It'll be interesting to see how, if at all, the data is shared between the US and EU nodes for the NastyPoP payouts.  Does it transfer, or would it be ramping up just like starting over on any other PPLNS pool?

3/13 - 3/20
NastyPoP - 0.03402797BTC
NastyP2P - 0.05156673BTC
Expected - 0.0327BTC
Luck - 101.66%

OP is updated.

[nonnakip]

TheAnalogKid has opened up a US node for OgNasty that runs both the standard NastyP2P as well as the NastyPoP payouts.  It'll be interesting to see how, if at all, the data is shared between the US and EU nodes for the NastyPoP payouts.  Does it transfer, or would it be ramping up just like starting over on any other PPLNS pool?

All NastyPool nodes work together. If you switch to a different node you will see your stats appear on a separate graph and listed separately on the NastyPoP tables. But when it is time for a distribution all hashes are combined on all nodes.

In the future the charts and tables will show what node the miner is using. This will clarify things. There are also a few other display issues to work out. But the real data is correctly tracked and that is the important thing.

Be free to switch back and forth between nodes as you wish. Your hashes will be counted correctly. Some miners set up the USA node as a backup.

[TheAnalogKid]

I'll confirm (for what it's worth )that during testing things worked across nodes as expected.  I had miners pointed to both nodes with the same registered address, and my hashrate and share count reflected as it should, even after failovers or manual switches between nodes.

I've re-pointed all my miners now to the US node with the original EU node as failover, works well.

[jonnybravo0311]

nonnakip and TheAnalogKid, that's great news!  Not losing your share count when moving from the US to EU and back is a big win.

EDIT:

Just some info about the US node hosted by TheAnalogKid... ping:

Code:

--- us-east01.nastyfans.org ping statistics ---
17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 21.145/24.460/37.589/4.421 ms

EU ping:

Code:

--- nastyfans.org ping statistics ---
17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 109.459/112.000/127.308/3.961 ms

I'm going to move my miners to be primary at the US node and backup on the EU and continue the tests.  By the way, are the graphs/stats still hosted on the main site (nastyfans.org) or would miners pointed to the US node look there to see graphs and stats?

Never mind, I see that the stats show up separately on the nastyfans.org site.

[kano]

Av 24ms vs Av 112ms

Lets see what those number actually mean

0.024s out of an average of 30s per share-change means that you'd expect about 0.08% rejects
0.112s out of an average of 30s per share-change means that you'd expect about 0.4% rejects

So 4.7 times a small amount ... seems to also be a small amount in this case.

What share-chain rejects do you actually get in p2pool? Around 7% 10% 13% ?
So clearly in this case the affect of that latency change shouldn't really make too much difference on finding share-chain shares

So the main problem would appear to be from the p2pool nodes to the other p2pool nodes ..........

We know on the blockchain the sort of network round time for blocks and thus expected orphan rates.
We know that pools with crappy connections and crappy software get more orphans than those without.
But on a normal pool that doesn't affect the shares (and is also happens 1/20th less often ... 600s vs 30s)

On p2pool it's the fact that ALL your share-chain shares are dependent upon that "network round time" that is also full of all sorts of quality hardware/network setups from good/maybe even good pool quality? down to crap performance/network connection quality.

Hmm, this should probably be in the p2pool thread, but it's a reply to your numbers

[jonnybravo0311]

Sorry for the few day delay on the updates, but before I get to the numbers, I'd like to take a moment to thank you, kano, for the analysis.  You've certainly addressed one of the issues of the decentralized nature of p2pool: reliance upon who-knows-what kind of hardware and connections and bandwidth across the network.  Because there are no real minimum requirements to setup a p2pool node, pretty much anybody who wants to do so, can.

This week I switched over to TheAnalogKid's node, located right up the road from me.  The switchover was completely seamless as the work I'd done on the NastyPoP was tracked and kept right on going.  From my perspective, the only way a miner would even know if he'd moved from the US to EU or back is that on the nastyfans miner status page, a new graph appears.

Speaking of those graphs, it sure would be nice to see the share lines colored differently for dead and orphaned shares.  Currently a miner cannot tell if a submitted share-chain share was accepted.  For example, the first 3 or 4 share-chain shares I submitted on the US node were likely either dead or orphaned.  Of course, it could have been that previous shares were dropping off the chain right as the new ones were being found.  I couldn't tell, and that's why I'd like to see a visual representation... say red for orphans and purple for dead.

Alright, onto the numbers... my NastyP2P miner suffered some dead/orphaned shares (I think) at the beginning of the week, and the payouts reflect it.

3/20 - 3/27
NastyPoP - 0.02843568BTC
NastyP2P - 0.01970915BTC
Expected - 0.033BTC
Luck - 90.54%

OP updated

[jonnybravo0311]

Another week in the books.  P2Pool itself was close to 100% luck, and the NastyPoP payouts were almost exactly expected earnings.  My NastyP2P miner had a lucky streak and made more than expectations.  Here are the numbers:

3/27 - 4/3
NastyPoP - 0.03301631BTC
NastyP2P - 0.05550941BTC
Expected - 0.0332BTC
Luck - 97.55%

OP updated

[nonnakip]

Speaking of those graphs, it sure would be nice to see the share lines colored differently for dead and orphaned shares.  Currently a miner cannot tell if a submitted share-chain share was accepted.

The graphs do not show dead shares. They do show orphaned shares. This does not help you. I add this feature to my list of "to do".

[jonnybravo0311]

Thanks nonnakip, that would be a nice visual addition to the graphs to see.  Hopefully you'll be able to get to it

Made it through another week and here are the numbers:

4/3 - 4/10
NastyPoP - 0.02866930BTC
NastyP2P - 0.03528256BTC
Expected - 0.0318BTC
Luck - 113.4%

OP updated

[jonnybravo0311]

8 days and 7 hours.  That's how long it's been since p2pool found a block.  In other words, this week's numbers are a big fat goose egg.  On the bright side, it's the very first week of the test that both NastyP2P and NastyPoP paid exactly the same .

4/10 - 4/17
NastyPoP - 0.00028594BTC
NastyP2P - 0BTC
Expected - 0.0313BTC
Luck - 0%

OP updated

EDIT: As OgNasty pointed out, I did in fact receive a payout from NastyPoP.  Even though no blocks were found, because NastyPoP payouts include the donations from 300 seats, I got some BTC.

[OgNasty]

In other words, this week's numbers are a big fat goose egg.  On the bright side, it's the very first week of the test that both NastyP2P and NastyPoP paid exactly the same .

Actually you did earn 0.00028594 BTC mining on NastyPoP last week. NastyPoP miners split the earnings of 300 NastyFans seats as a bonus in addition to mined coins. That amount is currently not terribly exciting, but this does highlight the fact that NastyPoP miners will earn BTC even if p2pool doesn't find any blocks.

[jonnybravo0311]

In other words, this week's numbers are a big fat goose egg.  On the bright side, it's the very first week of the test that both NastyP2P and NastyPoP paid exactly the same .

Actually you did earn 0.00028594 BTC mining on NastyPoP last week. NastyPoP miners split the earnings of 300 NastyFans seats as a bonus in addition to mined coins. That amount is currently not terribly exciting, but this does highlight the fact that NastyPoP miners will earn BTC even if p2pool doesn't find any blocks.

You're absolutely right about the earnings.  When I saw the transaction notification I thought it might have been some faucet payout and didn't even think it would be from NastyPoP seat donations.  I'll amend the numbers to reflect the payout.

[trendax]

jonnybravo0311, just wanted to say thanks for maintaining this long running comparison. Great job. 

[OgNasty]

jonnybravo0311, just wanted to say thanks for maintaining this long running comparison. Great job. 

+1

I think this thread has done as much to bring awareness to NastyPool as anything.  He also highlighted a few shortcomings with NastyPool that have been and are continuing to be addressed.  I thank jonnybravo0311 for these things as well.

[jonnybravo0311]

trendax and OgNasty, it's my pleasure.  I'm a big proponent of p2pool mining.  I've been running my own node for over a year, and have spent many hours helping others in the p2pool threads.  OgNasty and nonnakip are the only ones who have actually stepped up and done something to address the shortcomings experienced in your typical p2pool setup.  Small miners now have a chance to contribute to the decentralized nature of p2pool without suffering the terrible variance mining on a standard node provides.

And with that, let's take a look at the numbers from this past week:

4/17 - 4/24
NastyPoP - 0.05554895BTC
NastyP2P - 0.05281205BTC
Expected - 0.0321BTC
Luck - 165.47%

P2Pool was considerably luckier this week than it was the week prior and both my S3s performed better than expected.  The edge went to NastyPoP this week, but just barely.  Again, you can see the inherent variance in standard p2pool mining as my block payouts ranged from 0.01BTC down to 0.001BTC, since my S3 decided to go on a share finding strike .

OP updated

[OgNasty]

4/17 - 4/24
NastyPoP - 0.05554895BTC
NastyP2P - 0.05281205BTC
Expected - 0.0321BTC
Luck - 165.47%

That's what I like to see!

[jonnybravo0311]

Another week and p2pool's luck was not so good at just under 60%.  Only 3 blocks were found and as a result both NastyPoP and NastyP2P were below expected values.  Here are the numbers:

4/24 - 5/1
NastyPoP - 0.02111442BTC
NastyP2P - 0.02415729BTC
Expected - 0.0325BTC
Luck - 59.99%

OP updated