Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 435. (Read 2591964 times)

Doesn't change.

Check it yourself.. p2pool.smoothrunnings.ca:9332

No try ctrl f5

Other than port 9333 and 9332 is there any other ports that need to be opened on the firewall?

I find when I had one of my miners using my external IP that the table under the hashing table would not update, as soon as I set my miner to the LAN IP of my pool and connected it to my LAN the table updates. Last night I moved my miner off site and its now pointed to the external IP and the table isn't updating. Though the hashing table above it is updating. So I wonder if this is a bug or if I need to open some other port to allow the table to properly update?

Thanks,

As tiny followup, say we want the 3.1 TH miner to have a .01% chance of having 0 shares in a 72 hour period. Don't want him to be upset. Difficulty 20590000 does that.

(20590000 * -ln(1.0 - .9999) ) * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 / 60 = 71.99 Hours

Average time to find a share:

20590000 * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 = 469 Minutes (7.81 Hours)

Or about 9.2 shares on the sharechain. A savings of 140 shares while keeping the risk of big miners getting no payment at all effectively at zero. (Just more variance in how much their actual payments are, to help lower variance for smaller miners.)

Edit: I didn't consider the orphan/DOA rate in p2pool's sharechain network. If you only submit a small # of giant shares, and one of them is orphaned, that could actually end up a sizable blow to your income?

Yeah, I was used to the 1-2 pay outs per day...

Ok so I just amused and entertained myself by reading the past ~5 months of posts in this topic. I have some thoughts if anyone would care to comment and some questions at the end, and a thought experiment on setting the miner difficulty level to maximize keeping smaller miners in the share chain.

---

Setting up a vanilla public node as a pseudo-pool for people who don't want (or can't) run their own p2pool is kinda a waste of time. There are plenty of good ones already. I toyed with the idea of setting up a pool about 8 months back but getting enough hash to join to actually find blocks didn't seem realistic. I ended up setting up a TRC pool instead, which was fun. (I took HHTT's sockthing pool software, wrote a DGM payment algorithm for it, and set that up for in-coinbase payment for all fees like Eligius which was one of my inspirations to set up a pool. Then I had to code a front end from scratch. At the time I knew very little about p2pool.)

Setting up a new BTC pool these days either means you have tons of hash power of your own, or hooking into p2pool's existing hash power to reduce local miner variance. But even setting up a latency routed network of nodes so people are directed to the nearest one to them doesn't matter much, since they likely already use a public node already that is "near" them with low latency already. (I was thinking about, just as a fun project, setting up 8 public nodes in each of Amazon's data centers around the world and latency routing people to the fastest one for them.)

To make setting up a public node have some sort of purpose, what you need to provide is something of value compared to other centralized pools. This could be anything from paying merged mining to the miners, improved stats/graphs/info, worker offline notifications, some sort of value added thing like multipool's coin switching, a system for reduced variance for small miners, etc. Since many nodes already run at a low to zero fee, it boils down to providing non-financial value added services or features?

---

Are shares on the p2pool share chain limited to only a single payment address? If so, is this an intentional design decision?

If not, it seems if a node wanted to run as a mini-pool to help smaller miners they could track stats however they choose to internally but put all of the pending payment info for their miners into the share being worked on. So if the share is found, all miners are paid their portions of the node's share (as if the node had collected the payment itself then re-paid it out). There's still the trust issue about calculating the amounts due to each local miner, but you keep the coinbase payout feature and smaller miners get paid with less variance since the share isn't limited to only the one miner that found it. Coins are also never held by the node, which helps reduce hacker incentive. (Coinbase payouts was a core design goal of my TRC pool. I never, ever, wanted to be holding someone else's money.)

This would also mean a share being worked on could include the pool fee (-f) with each share found, at the exact amount, instead of taking that % of shares in full. ie: If you run -f 1 and miner A finds a share, the share you send out to the network has payments of 99% of the total to Miner A and 1% of the total to the pool payment address. I'd think this would be much more intuitive to the node operator/miners/etc, and I'm guessing the only reason it doesn't work this way is that the share chain restricts each share to a single payment address?

---

Also, a question / thought. Did anything ever come of lenny_'s suggestion to increase a large miners difficulty higher so they only find (at most, on average) one share every hour? Personally I'd suggest cranking that up even higher as a default. The miner can override it back down with /diff if they insist. The purpose of this is to try and allow more, smaller, miners to fit into the share chain. By lowering global share difficultly, as well as individual miners having less total blocks. I realize the 1.67% or so adjustment is already in there but that's still 149 shares out of 8640. How little variance does a large miner actually need in reality? As long as you are on the share chain you are getting paid each time a block is found.

1 giant fat share is as good as 149 shares that add up to the same amount. It just smooths your payments out, between when giant fat share drops off and the next giant fat share comes on. I wouldn't suggest trying to actually scale large miners to only have 1 share every 3 days (they would in effect be more similar to how small miners are today then). But if we were to say that 6 large shares on the chain on average is enough to give them acceptably low payment variance (I'm pulling this number out of the air so I have someplace to start), then that frees up 143 shares for other miners...

Organofconti can chime in with his real math-fu if he likes (please do!), but as far as I can reverse engineer from my pool's stats calculations the magic would be this (we want to target a share every 12 hours on average, to aim for 6 blocks in the share chain)

Average time to find a block (share) in minutes = Difficulty * pow(2,32) / Hashrate / 60

720 Minutes * 60 * Hashrate / pow(2,32) = Difficulty

So given a worker's average hashrate, set their difficulty to the above.

For an example I took the biggest miner on the biggest public node. Their hash rate is reporting as 3142484404906. (3.1 TH) Share difficulty is at 651000. Right now their average time to find a share is:

652000 * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 = 14.85 minutes

I don't know what local difficulty p2pool is serving them, but it should be higher than 652000 so they will only end up with around 1.67% of the shares. They will get about twice that if they are only getting difficulty 652000 work.

Solve for 1 block every 12 hours on average:

(720 * 60 ) * 3142484404906 / 2^32 = 31608000 Difficulty

So if we give this 3.1TH miner 31608000 difficulty work, his average time is 720 minutes (12 Hours)

50% CDF = (31608000 * -ln(1.0 - .50) ) * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 = 499 minutes (8.31 Hours)
95% CDF = (31608000 * -ln(1.0 - .95) ) * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 = 2156 minutes (35.93 Hours)
99% CDF = (31608000 * -ln(1.0 - .99) ) * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 = 3315 minutes (55.25 Hours)
99.752% CDF = (31608000 * -ln(1.0 - .99752) ) * 2^32 / 3142484404906 / 60 / 60 = 4319.64 Minutes (71.99 Hours)

Which means, given 72 hours of work at this hash rate and miner difficulty level (the time it takes for the share chain to be totally new, correct?) the miner will fail to have found at least 1 share only .348% of the time. And as long as they have at least 1 share in the chain (at this way higher difficultly level) they are still getting paid on every block the p2pool network finds. The amount of payment will have some variance (since there are so few total shares), but whether or not they get paid at all is a virtually zero chance of getting nothing.

Obviously if 6 shares is too few or the .348% risk of having no shares in the chain too high, it can be adjusted however you want. But do even medium size miners need 10+ shares per day on the chain? Does a giant miner need 149 shares?

The current luck is painful...

No, it's not me. Also, this LennyCoin thing is not mine, just a coincidence with name;)

Is this you? http://www.reddit.com/r/itslenny/

You can choose second from the top node - http://lenny.dnsd.me:9332, I am this node operator. 2nd largest p2pool node online with 3TH/s onboard. It's very well connected and have higher chance for valid share than other nodes (less orphans). Running unmodified p2pool software on dedicated server. Anyone is invited to try my node.

Awesome. Thank you!

You don't create a miner. Just use your payment address as username, and any password you want. The work you do will be paid to your payment address each time a block is found.

So to setup my AntMiner S1 on a p2pool node I just select any from the list here: http://p2pool-nodes.info and then how do I create the miner for one of these pools?

Yeah it sucks, but it's normal, based on my experience.  Occasionally you'll get multiple shares in a day though.  It seems to even out over time. 

Mining for 3.7 days.

Anything up to 3-4 times the expected interval is pretty normal.

You will also get multiple shares in a day sometimes.

It averages out. 

This assumes of course that your miners are working correctly.

How long have you been mining?

Is it normal that I haven't found a share yet?



P2Pool BTC

Graphs

Version: 13.4

Pool rate: 189TH/s (15% DOA+orphan) Share difficulty: 896000

Node uptime: 3.7 days Peers: 7 out, 5 in

Local rate: 27.8GH/s (5.6% DOA) Expected time to share: 1.6 days

Shares: 0 total (0 orphaned, 0 dead) Efficiency:

Payout if a block were found NOW: 0 BTC to 14Jr6VHQGjQiwQoPJxm2FBYpmaVqLpTPy2. Expected after mining for 24 hours: 0.00367 BTC per block.

Current block value: 25.23617788 BTC Expected time to block: 13.8 hours

Share explorer

Best share: 35c1dd74

Verified heads: 07bb493f 35c1dd74 450631bd 8a764f0b d7953bcb

Heads: 07bb493f 35c1dd74 450631bd 8a764f0b d7953bcb

Verified tails: 54642d14

Tails: 54642d14

My shares:

Blocks found in last day:

Note that blocks may have been orphaned from the P2Pool chain and so not be here.

time   number   hash/explorer link   share
Sun Jan 26 2014 10:37:17 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time)   282574   0000000000000001e35e0e3a0dfaa20419b1be361092b5f75e21e5fad0ebbe75   →
Payouts if a block were found NOW:

I've not tried it, but I assume you can do -n multiple times.

-n address1:port1 -n address2:port2

Can you add more than 1 node to your P2Pool server, if so how to do add it? -n address:port address:port ?