Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 27. (Read 2591916 times)

frodocooper

Respectfully I agree that everyone has their own reasons for making their choices.

Believe it or not I respect that Jtoomim does try to help others more as you also do and for that I am great full.

The example of slushpool was just that ... an example which was known to be a limited example.

I have no issue with anyone knowingly choosing to use Jtoomim's code. I might be interested in trying it myself.
The way Jtoomim's presentation comes off to me is "He is right."
Kind of rubs me the wrong way.

I have issue with is someone pushing their Opinion on what the future holds.
What I was trying to tell him is "A boulder will move down stream with the Current. Stop trying to force the Boulder."
Not that it will make any sense to the young people out there ...

State your views please.
Stop finding fault with others in a public forum.
I can cite several examples of this in the past 3 pages from Jtoomim.
If you think it is wrong try to work "one on one" or "one on two" to fix the problem.

Further I think there is to much animosity between Jtoomim and veqtrus based on what I have seen in the limited time I have been on here.
Maybe in a few years when they have mellowed with age they might be able to get over that and work together to make something great.

Honestly I am to old to wanna listen to anyone who comes off as squabbling brats
If I had them both in my presence I would do one of two things ...
Get them drunk and let them sort it out.
Or take them out back ...

But what do I know I am just a old hardware guy

Respectfully

BB

Slush Pool is merely one pool out of dozens, and represents only around 7% of Bitcoin's total hashrate. This makes for a significantly unrepresentative sample (and a very selective one, if I may say so) to base a statistical analysis of fork support on.


The source that jtoomim cited (Coin Dance) gets its information from the BIP9 version bits and the coinbase text of every mined block. Around 91% of the last 1000 mined blocks have the "NYA" flag set in the coinbase text, indicating the blocks' miners' intention to support SegWit2x. This information is from the mined blocks themselves. You will find that Blockchain's stats line up with Coin Dance's.

Please do your research before making such (inaccurate) claims.


I agree that it is a good move on jtoomim's part to have included support for both Bitcoin Core and btc1 (and soon, for Bitcoin Cash). I'm grateful that he has (so far) not imposed his own personal opinions regarding Bitcoin forks on jtoomimnet's users.

However, jtoomim does not "have blinders on." He knows what he's doing; his work on P2Pool, at the very least, speaks for him. It is his personal opinion that the SegWit2x chain would be the dominant one, in very much the same way that it is your personal opinion that the Bitcoin Core chain would be the dominant one. He based his personal opinion on current block statistics, and you based your personal opinion on your own reasons. Nothing wrong with either; they're just different opinions. You would therefore do well to acknowledge that inasmuch as you're entitled to your own opinions, jtoomim is entitled to his as well.


Just because you currently do not have issues with mainnet's memory consumption doesn't mean that others don't or won't. Not everyone has the luxury of having 24 GB of RAM to play with.

Anyway, to use your logic and your preference for unrepresentative samples, I myself was not, and am not, intimidated into running jtoomim's code. Even though I disagree with jtoomim regarding SegWit2x (I believe that the Bitcoin Core chain will prevail, and I intend to continue using and mining the Bitcoin Core chain), I willingly chose to run jtoomimnet because it runs more efficiently, its design is fairer to smaller miners like myself, and it generates more revenue per block than mainnet.

Therefore, inasmuch as you have your reasons for running v17 and you're happy with your decision to do so, I have my reasons for running v33 and I'm happy with my decision to do so.

Well I am not having any issues with it Jtoomim ...
of course I am a hardware guy and am running around 24 gb of ram on the system with the node on it ...
I am not running skimpy systems and don't intend to ...
but that being said I have my reasons for running v17 and am happy with my decision to do so ...

Please stop trying to intimidate everyone to jumping onto your code.

Respectfully

BB

Binaries with pypy are impossible. In order to use pypy, you need to run from source.

pypy uses a TON of RAM. v17 does not have the optimizations I made on my branch to reduce RAM usage by around 4x. Consequently, you can expect the RAM usage on pypy v17 to grow up to around 8 GB. Unless you have 16 GB on your node, running CPython with v17 is probably a better idea.

If you use v33 (my code -- https://github.com/jtoomim/p2pool/tree/1mb_segwit), then pypy is definitely recommended, as the RAM usage is more manageable (around 3-4 GB, despite handling around 2x as many transactions).

Thanks so much ... that fixed me up and my node is going again and finally in the correct version ...
 Happy man here ...

  i am lucky !  ... p2pool v17 starting up right now ....

P2Pool release 17.0 - commit hash: 62fa7b020b82a92138d7652c26be2953b26fd4e5

HARDFORK - Upgrade URGENTLY required in the next few days.

Windows binary: http://u.forre.st/u/iqvaqprd/p2pool_win32_17.0.zip
Windows binary signature: http://u.forre.st/u/ysrjpsls/p2pool_win32_17.0.zip.sig
Source zipball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/zipball/17.0
Source tarball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/tarball/17.0

Changes:

* SegWit compatibility
* Increased new transactions size limit per share to allow producing larger blocks
* Requires Bitcoin >= 0.13.1

SegWit (segregated witness) **has already activated** and for P2Pool to continue working without producing invalid blocks, everyone needs to upgrade. At 50% of our hashrate upgrading, P2Pool instances will start displaying a warning saying that an upgrade is required. Reaching that point as quickly as possible is very important. And then, at 95%, users that have not upgraded will be excluded. If non-upgraded users aren't excluded soon enough, P2Pool users will be subject to paying other users for invalid work - effectively a withholding attack.

Due to SegWit already activating upgraded users of P2Pool must not mine SegWit transactions as they are incompatible with older P2Pool versions. After v17 shares activate a new release will be made which removes this restriction.

So, please upgrade to 17.0 now and also tell everyone else to.

Hey People,

still no Windows version off P2Pool aviable to mining Segwit blocks ?

v16 = Python2.7
v17 = pypy.

So ... that's why i ask for a binary.

Perfect.

I think the 2 that can help you are jtoomin and veqtrus.

I don't think either of them agree on much of anything but they seem the most knowledgeable in this forum there is also a github area that has comments and such ... I keep losing my way there though ...

Hello all,

I'm looking for technical information about P2pool. My goal is to understand the source code of P2pool, so that I get a better understanding of how the pool works. I've already read https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool, and quite a lot of posts on this forum, but now I'm looking for information related to how for example shares are constructed, how they are transmitted, how the difficulty is adjusted, etc... I've been looking so far to the code on github, using the bitcoin wiki as a guide, but I'm wondering whether there is some sort of guide available that contains more information? I'm familiar with Python and programming in general, so that is not an issue.

Any suggestions on the best way to tackle this?

Thank you.

Thank you Veqtrus

I will dig in and see what I come up with ...

BB

I wrote a guide for vtc but it may help you with btc too if you want to run from source. Also use the master branch which includes a necessary commit.

Jtoomim

Respectfully I believe your assumption that support for Segwit2x as the dominate chain is wrong. In slushpool the strongest support goes to Bitcoin with only 10% signaling for for the fork. I don't know but the source you are showing as evidence may only be getting their information from like minded people and not from the community as a whole. As for the exchanges signaling their support , I know that Coinbase was not going to support it to begin with and then rethought it from a economic point of view in that they can make money off of the split from people moving their coin from one branch to another after the split.

I think people are people and will move in their own self interest which is why it has taken so long just to get segwit to activation in the first place. People do not like to feel uncomfortable expressly when their money is involved. The new chain will have to prove itself before people will jump into the pool. Look at how long it took Bitcoin to increase in value over $10.00 per coin. Consider Litecoin, Darkcoin, Dogcoin, Ethereum and all the rest. Ethereum is one of the newest and has been preforming better that Litecoin which has been around longer. What has happened to the others?

I think is a good move on your part to support both sides until you know which way the coin will land. I believe you may have blinders on though.

Respectfully,

BB

 

Thanks.That will help me planing my node creation project although is on a mini laptop.But i hope it works.

Safer? It depends on how the November fork plays out. It will be safer to use whichever node the other people you want to transact with are using.

btc1 will follow Segwit2x. Bitcoin Core will not.

Currently, 90.9% of the network hashrate is signaling support for Segwit2x (https://coin.dance/blocks). Segwit2x also has the support of Bitpay, Coinbase, and every other major Bitcoin company that has registered an opinion on the matter except for Blockstream. Blockstream, plus a number of smaller companies (Échange de Montréal, Bitbrains, Bitstop) oppose it (https://coin.dance/poli).

Personally, I think Segwit2x will be the dominant chain. The data seem to be in its favor. I could be wrong, though.

The blockchain downloaded by btc1 and Bitcoin Core will be compatible until November. If you want to switch, all you need to do is stop one bitcoind and start the other. After the November fork, though, it will require you to resync your blockchain in order to switch between the two.

veqtrus's code (v17 shares) is incompatible with btc1, and only works with Bitcoin Core. My code will work with either btc1 or Bitcoin Core, though it will give you a warning message if you try to use Core.

OS is Windows 10 Professional

Downloaded v17 from https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/tree/17.0

followed directions in readme file to Reset Python27 however was unable to successfully install twisted. (as I said earlier I am not a coder I am a hardware guy) Everything else seemed to install ok.

I also noted that the run_p2pool application file is not present in v17 I am not sure if it is something that came from the v16 sig files but when I try to run the run_p2pool.py file it does nothing ...

Honestly I think I was lucky getting v16 to run.

At first I thought I would be able to replace the v16 files with the new v17 files ... that did not work.

Then I tried to configure from scratch. Still didn't work ... I am missing a step or two some where ...

I went back to the instructions for v16 they seam Identical ...

what steps have  I missed?

ForrestV talked with me and will be making a release soon.

Unless you provide us some details about the software you use we won't be able to help you. OS? From source or not?