Author

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 260. (Read 2591928 times)

legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
vi /etc/init.d/cgminer.sh

Press “i” (enter edit mode)
Scroll down to line 60 in the code, starting with :

PARAMS="--bitmain-dev....

change the queue parameters at the end of that string to:

--queue 0

press "esc" (exit edit mode), then type:

:wq      & hit enter.

Then click save & apply in the web UI miner configuration tab  Wink

EDIT: You'll have to do this after every reboot unfortunately, as it will reset to defaults. Just don't reboot it...... Grin

tyvm.  Do you set your worker difficulty, or just live with the p2pool varying one?

So far it setting the queue to 0 hasn't made a smidgen of difference on the rejects.  Trying 1 now.

M
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....
vi /etc/init.d/cgminer.sh

Press “i” (enter edit mode)
Scroll down to line 60 in the code, starting with :

PARAMS="--bitmain-dev....

change the queue parameters at the end of that string to:

--queue 0

press "esc" (exit edit mode), then type:

:wq      & hit enter.

Then click save & apply in the web UI miner configuration tab  Wink

EDIT: You'll have to do this after every reboot unfortunately, as it will reset to defaults. Just don't reboot it...... Grin
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
The number 1 issue is fixed with latest firmware, which runs cgminer 4.6.1.  When the work restart request comes in, I usually see the flush work within 1 second, then the new block task usually arrives in another second.  Often there are new accepted shares submitted within 2 seconds of the work restart request.  The new cgminer 4.6.1 has brought new life to the S2.  I used to point the S2's to a different pool, while all my other miners used P2Pool.  It's so nice to see them doing the full 1000 GH/s with P2Pool.  I have 2x S2's and 2x C1's, and all 4 of them run neck-and-neck.

Are you sure this is fixed?  I upgraded my S2 to the newest firmware, and yes I get 1 TH/s now, but I still get 10-15% rejects because of the 30 second work restarts that the Ant can't respond to quick enough.

M

I'm getting ~3% using the -queue 0 setting mdude - have you tried that?

It's leveled out to 6.7%.  I haven't adjusted the queue yet.  What file do I need to change for that?  I'm still a linux n00b.

M
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....
The number 1 issue is fixed with latest firmware, which runs cgminer 4.6.1.  When the work restart request comes in, I usually see the flush work within 1 second, then the new block task usually arrives in another second.  Often there are new accepted shares submitted within 2 seconds of the work restart request.  The new cgminer 4.6.1 has brought new life to the S2.  I used to point the S2's to a different pool, while all my other miners used P2Pool.  It's so nice to see them doing the full 1000 GH/s with P2Pool.  I have 2x S2's and 2x C1's, and all 4 of them run neck-and-neck.

Are you sure this is fixed?  I upgraded my S2 to the newest firmware, and yes I get 1 TH/s now, but I still get 10-15% rejects because of the 30 second work restarts that the Ant can't respond to quick enough.

M

I'm getting ~3% using the -queue 0 setting mdude - have you tried that?
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
The number 1 issue is fixed with latest firmware, which runs cgminer 4.6.1.  When the work restart request comes in, I usually see the flush work within 1 second, then the new block task usually arrives in another second.  Often there are new accepted shares submitted within 2 seconds of the work restart request.  The new cgminer 4.6.1 has brought new life to the S2.  I used to point the S2's to a different pool, while all my other miners used P2Pool.  It's so nice to see them doing the full 1000 GH/s with P2Pool.  I have 2x S2's and 2x C1's, and all 4 of them run neck-and-neck.

Are you sure this is fixed?  I upgraded my S2 to the newest firmware, and yes I get 1 TH/s now, but I still get 10-15% rejects because of the 30 second work restarts that the Ant can't respond to quick enough.

M
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
WANTED: Active dev to fix & re-write p2pool in C
Whoever is mining on my node using address 1PuEtn8MzGbF58r1KLXwAnyvtq5g2FLZsw, your DOA rate is rather high. PM me & we'll see if we can improve it  Smiley
member
Activity: 78
Merit: 10
Wow, sorry about that.  You can find it at nodes.p2pool.co



Looks really good.

Have not evaluated the scoring, but have three suggestions that would make this the go-to resource for choosing a p2pool node:

1. Try to include all active nodes automatically - perhaps by looking at each discovered nodes complete peer list for missing nodes?

2. Latency scoring is basically irrelevant unless you are running from the visitors computer (or close to it) to the actual node, when I looked into this a while ago the most suitable solution I found was https://www.ookla.com/ Netguage, however the price of the service was prohibitive for me, perhaps you will come up with a better solution.

3. If you solve the latency and missing node issue, a valuable service to node operators would be to provide an export of the 10 best/closest online nodes to add to the command line when starting p2pool.

Great work!

Thanks for the suggestions and glad you like nodes.p2pool.co.

1. Yes, automating collecting the node data will be in phase 2.  Getting this version out took me longer than I would have liked though so I could not get everything out all at once.

2. nodes.p2pool.co IS running from the visitors computer.  Other node finders grab some data from the node and calculate the time to get that data.  Unless you run that test many times it is a highly variable and poor latency test.  What nodes.p2pool.co does is it calculates the physical distance between your computer and each p2pool node.  (I use maxmind.com to locate the p2pool server from its IP address.)  From there it computes latency which is pretty accurate.  It calculates the speed of light between the two distances on the globe and multiples it by three since no connection is a straight line and it needs to travel through routers and since fiber slows the signal down a bit.  It also adds 20ms for the computers to process the signals.  Try it, it should be a pretty accurate method.  With all that said I will still check out Ookla - it is probably even more accurate.

3. Yes, I was thinking the same.  However, does p2pool actually figure this out on its own over time?  I actually don't know but looking at the logs I know it drops unresponsive peers and pulls in new ones.
legendary
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
Wow, sorry about that.  You can find it at nodes.p2pool.co



Looks really good.

Have not evaluated the scoring, but have three suggestions that would make this the go-to resource for choosing a p2pool node:

1. Try to include all active nodes automatically - perhaps by looking at each discovered nodes complete peer list for missing nodes?

2. Latency scoring is basically irrelevant unless you are running from the visitors computer (or close to it) to the actual node, when I looked into this a while ago the most suitable solution I found was https://www.ookla.com/ Netguage, however the price of the service was prohibitive for me, perhaps you will come up with a better solution.

3. If you solve the latency and missing node issue, a valuable service to node operators would be to provide an export of the 10 best/closest online nodes to add to the command line when starting p2pool.

Great work!
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
WANTED: Active dev to fix & re-write p2pool in C
Wow, sorry about that.  You can find it at nodes.p2pool.co

Well look at that - top UK p2pool node........ Wink

I like your scoring method  Cheesy Cheesy
member
Activity: 78
Merit: 10
Wow, sorry about that.  You can find it at nodes.p2pool.co

member
Activity: 87
Merit: 10
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
I just created a new p2pool node scanner.  The other ones were either too buggy and even at the times they were not I still could never figure out which p2pool to mine.  How much does latency matter over "efficiency if no miners"? 

So I created the P2Pool.co Node Scanner.  I think it is the best P2Pool node scanner out there.

...

Where can we access it?

yeah, i try to find it too but cant locate it, need info
legendary
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
I just created a new p2pool node scanner.  The other ones were either too buggy and even at the times they were not I still could never figure out which p2pool to mine.  How much does latency matter over "efficiency if no miners"? 

So I created the P2Pool.co Node Scanner.  I think it is the best P2Pool node scanner out there.

...

Where can we access it?
member
Activity: 78
Merit: 10
I just created a new p2pool node scanner at nodes.p2pool.co.  The other ones were either too buggy and even at the times they were not I still could never figure out which p2pool to mine.  How much does latency matter over "efficiency if no miners"?  

So I created the P2Pool.co Node Scanner.  I think it is the best P2Pool node scanner out there.

It includes a scoring algorithm to highlight the best p2pool near your location, and it factors every datapoint and combines it into a p2pool score.

The latency numbers are much more realistic than other node scanners (compare our latency numbers to actual pings that you run yourself and compare them to the other p2pool node scanners).

If you would like us to add your node or if you have any ideas to make this scanner better than PM me.

I would also like your feedback on the scoring algorithm.  At it stands now this is how the scoring works:

  • The score starts at 100
  • 16 * the fee is subtracted (fees are bad)
  • 4 * the donation fee is subtracted (donations are less bad)
  • 16 * the latency (ms) divided by 100 is subtracted (latency caries much weight with p2pool)
  • 8 * the getwork latency (ms) divided by 100 is subtracted (GWL is important as well)
  • Efficiency over 100 divided by 2 is added (under 100 is subtracted) (efficiency over 100% is good and less than 100% is bad)
  • Same for Efficiency If Miner Perfect (Nodes should not be punished if they just have a bad miner)
  • For 0 or 1 users, 8 is subtracted from the score (Low user p2pools have efficiencies rate that are unrealistically high)
  • Hash rate (TH/s) is divided by four and than added (people will put up more hashes the more they like the pool)
  • Uptime over 2 days adds a point and 0 days subtracts a point
  • An unknown version of the p2pool software subtracts 10 points
  • A warning (like bitcoind not running) gives a score of 0
newbie
Activity: 64
Merit: 0
Looks like p2pool miners just gout the first donation we have received in a while Smiley
You're welcome.  I sent the donation - hit a block of NMC/DVC, converted to BTC and donated to everyone.

Thanks!
legendary
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
Looks like p2pool miners just gout the first donation we have received in a while Smiley
You're welcome.  I sent the donation - hit a block of NMC/DVC, converted to BTC and donated to everyone.

Nice one! Was thinking last week I had not seen a donation in a while Smiley
member
Activity: 78
Merit: 10
Looks like p2pool miners just gout the first donation we have received in a while Smiley
You're welcome.  I sent the donation - hit a block of NMC/DVC, converted to BTC and donated to everyone.
Thanks!  It is good to be a p2pool miner.
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
How does giving a chip more work not create more heat?  Even if all the heat is from running idle at clock speed, I could see a custom scenario where you could send api calls to the miners to adjust their clock based on whether they're getting real or fake work.  What percentage of work is real versus fake?
You aren't giving the chip more work.  The miner solves difficulty 1 shares.  The miner has no idea whatsoever if the work is "real" or "fake".  It just knows it has work to do.

I'm not going to pretend to have the best understanding of this so, please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I thought you had to give the mining hardware a chunk of work for it to process anything.  Are you saying that if I have a completely unconfigured miner it will be making up it's own work and trying to solve it?  I can see that the hashing chips wouldn't know the difference but, if my local p2pool node knows the difference, it could also know to tell the mining hardware to speed up or speed down.
You're confusing "results" with "work". The work is always the same. The diff you're configuring is telling the miner what results it's interested in.
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
Looks like p2pool miners just gout the first donation we have received in a while Smiley
You're welcome.  I sent the donation - hit a block of NMC/DVC, converted to BTC and donated to everyone.
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
How does giving a chip more work not create more heat?  Even if all the heat is from running idle at clock speed, I could see a custom scenario where you could send api calls to the miners to adjust their clock based on whether they're getting real or fake work.  What percentage of work is real versus fake?
You aren't giving the chip more work.  The miner solves difficulty 1 shares.  The miner has no idea whatsoever if the work is "real" or "fake".  It just knows it has work to do.

I'm not going to pretend to have the best understanding of this so, please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I thought you had to give the mining hardware a chunk of work for it to process anything.  Are you saying that if I have a completely unconfigured miner it will be making up it's own work and trying to solve it?  I can see that the hashing chips wouldn't know the difference but, if my local p2pool node knows the difference, it could also know to tell the mining hardware to speed up or speed down.
You do give the hardware a chunk of work to process.  Basically you say, "create a block from this set of data".  If you have a 1TH/s miner, the miner will apply one trillion hashes per second to that data set.  If your miners aren't configured to any pool, or coin daemon, they sit idle since they have no work to do.  The mining software and the pool determine which of those results to actually submit.
legendary
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
Looks like p2pool miners just gout the first donation we have received in a while Smiley
Jump to: