[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 241.

idonothave

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: yslyung on January 07, 2015, 02:00:48 PM

weird recent block #337952 ... it's found by antpool ? is that part of the p2pool network ? no pay from this block yet.

after the block was found, my pool went a little cuckoo, started to get some weird msg's (didnt copy sorry) after couple of minutes it went back to normal but my rejected hashrate spiked up !

antpool provides their own "opensource version" of p2pool, which differs from the original mainly with the fact it is not paying transaction fees to the miners.

Duce

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

I can't resist... a bug you say, why it is "Ant" pool. Grin

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: MissouriMiner on January 07, 2015, 03:30:15 PM

Quote from: windpath on January 07, 2015, 03:22:18 PM

Quote from: yslyung on January 07, 2015, 02:00:48 PM

weird recent block #337952 ... it's found by antpool ? is that part of the p2pool network ? no pay from this block yet.

after the block was found, my pool went a little cuckoo, started to get some weird msg's (didnt copy sorry) after couple of minutes it went back to normal but my rejected hashrate spiked up !

Orphan race, AntPool won.

That is our first orphan in 37 days, not to shabby....

Bummer. It is strange that AntPool has not yet reconciled on their side. Their pool be confused! Tongue

That is definitely a bug (or 2)...

1. No possible way to have 5 blocks with 0 confirmations.

2. 337952 shows with 0 transactions (25 BTC reward), however it was a large block, 2,493 transactions...

MissouriMiner

sr. member

Activity: 312

Merit: 250

Quote from: windpath on January 07, 2015, 03:22:18 PM

Quote from: yslyung on January 07, 2015, 02:00:48 PM

weird recent block #337952 ... it's found by antpool ? is that part of the p2pool network ? no pay from this block yet.

after the block was found, my pool went a little cuckoo, started to get some weird msg's (didnt copy sorry) after couple of minutes it went back to normal but my rejected hashrate spiked up !

Orphan race, AntPool won.

That is our first orphan in 37 days, not to shabby....

Bummer. It is strange that AntPool has not yet reconciled on their side. Their pool be confused! Tongue

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: yslyung on January 07, 2015, 02:00:48 PM

weird recent block #337952 ... it's found by antpool ? is that part of the p2pool network ? no pay from this block yet.

after the block was found, my pool went a little cuckoo, started to get some weird msg's (didnt copy sorry) after couple of minutes it went back to normal but my rejected hashrate spiked up !

Orphan race, AntPool won.

That is our first orphan in 37 days, not to shabby....

Prelude

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1000

Quote from: jonnybravo0311 on January 07, 2015, 12:29:40 PM

Quote from: Prelude on January 07, 2015, 11:57:36 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on January 07, 2015, 05:32:11 AM

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 10:57:14 PM

Yep, they work perfectly with p2pool. Bitmain addressed the issue with the firmware they released on Oct. 16th, more or less. For slightly better results, it's best to use ck's firmware found here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9242449

Not sure I'd say perfectly? The still default to 8192 queue size and large amounts of stales. I got mine down to about 3.4% stales, which is almost twice as bad as my SP20s at 1.8% stale.

Thanks for the ck firmware link, didn't know about that, will have to try it.

M

Definitely give the firmware a try, you'll get better results. You'll want to follow this to set queue to 0: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9243760

I also add --scan-time 1 --expiry 1 along with lowering queue to 0 and adding --lowmem. Quite a pain in the ass to do every time the machine goes down, but worth it IMO.

CK has stated a few times that the --scan-time and --expiry parameters are useless, so you really don't need to bother with them. I hadn't tried --lowmem before, so I can't tell what value it adds if any. The biggest bang for the buck is setting --queue to 0, instead of their default 8192.

Good to know, guess I'll stop adding them. lowmem seems to help a little I think, give it a try. CK seems to think it's useful for S4s.

yslyung

legendary

Activity: 1500

Merit: 1002

Mine Mine Mine

weird recent block #337952 ... it's found by antpool ? is that part of the p2pool network ? no pay from this block yet.

after the block was found, my pool went a little cuckoo, started to get some weird msg's (didnt copy sorry) after couple of minutes it went back to normal but my rejected hashrate spiked up !

jonnybravo0311

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1024

Mine at Jonny's Pool

Quote from: Prelude on January 07, 2015, 11:57:36 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on January 07, 2015, 05:32:11 AM

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 10:57:14 PM

Yep, they work perfectly with p2pool. Bitmain addressed the issue with the firmware they released on Oct. 16th, more or less. For slightly better results, it's best to use ck's firmware found here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9242449

Not sure I'd say perfectly? The still default to 8192 queue size and large amounts of stales. I got mine down to about 3.4% stales, which is almost twice as bad as my SP20s at 1.8% stale.

Thanks for the ck firmware link, didn't know about that, will have to try it.

M

Definitely give the firmware a try, you'll get better results. You'll want to follow this to set queue to 0: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9243760

I also add --scan-time 1 --expiry 1 along with lowering queue to 0 and adding --lowmem. Quite a pain in the ass to do every time the machine goes down, but worth it IMO.

CK has stated a few times that the --scan-time and --expiry parameters are useless, so you really don't need to bother with them. I hadn't tried --lowmem before, so I can't tell what value it adds if any. The biggest bang for the buck is setting --queue to 0, instead of their default 8192.

Prelude

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1000

Quote from: mdude77 on January 07, 2015, 05:32:11 AM

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 10:57:14 PM

Yep, they work perfectly with p2pool. Bitmain addressed the issue with the firmware they released on Oct. 16th, more or less. For slightly better results, it's best to use ck's firmware found here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9242449

Not sure I'd say perfectly? The still default to 8192 queue size and large amounts of stales. I got mine down to about 3.4% stales, which is almost twice as bad as my SP20s at 1.8% stale.

Thanks for the ck firmware link, didn't know about that, will have to try it.

M

Definitely give the firmware a try, you'll get better results. You'll want to follow this to set queue to 0: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9243760

I also add --scan-time 1 --expiry 1 along with lowering queue to 0 and adding --lowmem. Quite a pain in the ass to do every time the machine goes down, but worth it IMO.

Duce

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

Quote from: windpath on January 07, 2015, 10:19:42 AM

Quote from: Duce on January 07, 2015, 09:53:47 AM

I have not seen this before and would like to know if anybody knows what this is. I did a search in this blog for any info but did not find any. I am running the Relay but did not see any association. Undecided

Code:

2015-01-07 06:43:15.305684 Sending 415 shares to 198.167.143.123:49545

It's a recently launched node updating its p2pool share chain.

Thanks

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: Duce on January 07, 2015, 09:53:47 AM

I have not seen this before and would like to know if anybody knows what this is. I did a search in this blog for any info but did not find any. I am running the Relay but did not see any association. Undecided

Code:

2015-01-07 06:43:15.305684 Sending 415 shares to 198.167.143.123:49545

It's a recently launched node updating its p2pool share chain.

Duce

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

I have not seen this before and would like to know if anybody knows what this is. I did a search in this blog for any info but did not find any. I am running the Relay but did not see any association. Undecided

Code:

2015-01-07 06:43:15.305684 Sending 415 shares to 198.167.143.123:49545

idonothave

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: grn on January 07, 2015, 01:11:46 AM

Quote from: IYFTech on January 06, 2015, 05:24:37 AM

That screen is localhost - not http://192.168.0.4:9332 Huh

localhost is that ip

if both 127.0.0.1:9332 and 192.168.0.4:9332 give You the same result then I would try another browser, if still the same I would try another version of python and rechecked whole installation process

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 10:57:14 PM

Yep, they work perfectly with p2pool. Bitmain addressed the issue with the firmware they released on Oct. 16th, more or less. For slightly better results, it's best to use ck's firmware found here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9242449

Not sure I'd say perfectly? The still default to 8192 queue size and large amounts of stales. I got mine down to about 3.4% stales, which is almost twice as bad as my SP20s at 1.8% stale.

Thanks for the ck firmware link, didn't know about that, will have to try it.

M

grn

sr. member

Activity: 357

Merit: 252

Quote from: IYFTech on January 06, 2015, 05:24:37 AM

That screen is localhost - not http://192.168.0.4:9332 Huh

localhost is that ip

Duce

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

Has anybody seen this before? I know P2P is kicking this connection out but I have been getting hit tonight from the same node 14.111.192.xxx but with a different last octet and port though. This is just one example.

Code:

2015-01-06 21:40:27.138214 Incoming connection to peer 14.111.192.252:63478 established. p2pool version: 1300 'e9b4018'

Then it gets kicked out:

Code:

2015-01-06 21:40:42.139539 > in handle_share_hashes:
2015-01-06 21:40:42.139653 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2015-01-06 21:40:42.139700 > Failure: twisted.internet.defer.TimeoutError: in GenericDeferrer
2015-01-06 21:40:42.140333 Lost peer 14.111.192.252:63478 - Connection was aborted locally, using.

I could just go block it I guess but as it is not connected longer than ~30sec not sure if I should bother. Has this happened to anybody here before and I have just been privileged?

EDIT: It looks like they gave up as of this morning.

Prelude

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1000

Quote from: jonnybravo0311 on January 06, 2015, 10:11:58 PM

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 05:20:33 PM

Thanks for the info, guys.

Quote from: windpath

To open it up to the public make sure ports 9332 and 9333 are open to the public and map to your p2pool server on your LAN...

Should 8333 be opened also to provide better node connectivity? I currently have 8333 and 9333 open.

Any security precautions to take into consideration?

Edit: Opened up 9332, and allowed responding to pings.

http://69.157.250.149:9332/static/

Would you fellas mind pinging my server and posting your results? Specifying your general location would be appreciated, too. The server is located in Montreal, Canada.

I just checked out your node... 5 S4s on it, 4 of which are reporting 2TH/s or greater. Looks like whatever firmware you're running is working out well on p2pool. Guess Bitmain finally got around to fixing that, huh?

I'm traveling for work this week (currently in Cleveland, OH). Ping to your server from here:
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 48.655/56.074/85.242/7.561 ms

Have you checked out Matt's relay network? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-and-why-pools-and-all-miners-should-use-the-relay-network-766190

Yep, they work perfectly with p2pool. Bitmain addressed the issue with the firmware they released on Oct. 16th, more or less. For slightly better results, it's best to use ck's firmware found here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9242449

That 5th S4 has a half dead hashing board, need to get it RMAed soon. Thanks for the ping results. As for the relay server, I've got that running too. I was expecting it to be complicated to set up, but thankfully it was easy as pie.

jonnybravo0311

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1024

Mine at Jonny's Pool

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 05:20:33 PM

Thanks for the info, guys.

Quote from: windpath

To open it up to the public make sure ports 9332 and 9333 are open to the public and map to your p2pool server on your LAN...

Should 8333 be opened also to provide better node connectivity? I currently have 8333 and 9333 open.

Any security precautions to take into consideration?

Edit: Opened up 9332, and allowed responding to pings.

http://69.157.250.149:9332/static/

Would you fellas mind pinging my server and posting your results? Specifying your general location would be appreciated, too. The server is located in Montreal, Canada.

I just checked out your node... 5 S4s on it, 4 of which are reporting 2TH/s or greater. Looks like whatever firmware you're running is working out well on p2pool. Guess Bitmain finally got around to fixing that, huh?

I'm traveling for work this week (currently in Cleveland, OH). Ping to your server from here:
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 48.655/56.074/85.242/7.561 ms

Have you checked out Matt's relay network? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-and-why-pools-and-all-miners-should-use-the-relay-network-766190

Prelude

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Duce on January 06, 2015, 09:21:48 PM

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 05:57:11 PM

Quote from: idonothave

what You have is more then good, no need to make any change, imho

Quote from: windpath

Ping from NYC (US east) ~60ms

You can ping yourself from various places here: http://www.pingtest.net/

Thanks for the link. Weird that you're getting 60ms, pinging Brooklyn gets me 25ms.

Added a second dashboard just now, will have to figure out which is best to use and how to customize it to my liking.

http://69.157.250.149:9332/static/p2pool-node-status/

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 97.756/101.354/107.775/3.277 ms from Southern California.

Thanks! That's pretty good considering the distance.

Duce

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

Quote from: Prelude on January 06, 2015, 05:57:11 PM

Quote from: idonothave

what You have is more then good, no need to make any change, imho

Quote from: windpath

Ping from NYC (US east) ~60ms

You can ping yourself from various places here: http://www.pingtest.net/

Thanks for the link. Weird that you're getting 60ms, pinging Brooklyn gets me 25ms.

Added a second dashboard just now, will have to figure out which is best to use and how to customize it to my liking.

http://69.157.250.149:9332/static/p2pool-node-status/

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 97.756/101.354/107.775/3.277 ms from Southern California.

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 241. (Read 2591928 times)