Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 445. (Read 2591964 times)

Your wifi......ditch it. 

I'm seeing 2 or 3 of these timeouts a minute consistently.  I assume that doesn't qualify as rarely.

I'm running Bitcoin-Qt (v0.8.6-beta I believe thats the latest, sum on mine and the latest download are same) and p2pool on a Mac Mini.  8333, 9333 and 9332 ports are forwarded.  Miners are on a RaspberryPi running bfgminer.  Network is WiFi.  My GetBlockTemplate latency mean for the last hour is .197s.

Anything specific I should look at?

Thanks!

ReplyMatcher matches replies to messages sent to bitcoind with responses. It's only used for the get_block_header message, and this error means that bitcoind didn't reply ... either it timed out or bitcoind doesn't have the header in question. So it could suggest that your Bitcoin node is slow or not up-to-date.. but seeing these rarely is normal.

Whatever "magic" happened for you it didn't happen for me.  I've had P2PoolExtendedFrontEnd installed for a while and still seeing these timeout errors.

2014-01-17 08:49:06.336406 > Unhandled error in Deferred:
2014-01-17 08:49:06.336631 > Unhandled Error
2014-01-17 08:49:06.336702 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2014-01-17 08:49:06.336760 > Failure: twisted.internet.defer.TimeoutError: in ReplyMatcher

What does "ReplyMatcher" do?

I stink that p2pool works like a charm, the only bad thing in it is share difficulty, if it could be divided to 1/10 from what it is now.... There would be alot of happy people smiling here and there ?

 

this txout is for identifying blocks of p2pool for internal funcitonality (ie, found block in last 24h and others)

I ran p2pool for 4 months when I was mining with GPUs.  It worked fine then.  Heck, I had a public node with other miners using it 24/7. 

But, that was 6 months ago. I stopped using p2pool because it couldn't cope with my shiny new ASICMiner Blades.  I left hoping things would be fixed and I'd be back.

Time has moved on, p2pool has been left back in August 2013 with all sorts of issues, which the devs won't or can't fix. They do the "it's someone else's fault" thing that every other software developer defaults to when they don't have a clue.

I still love the idea of p2pool, but its SO FUCKING FRUSTRATING that it isn't being fixed so it WORKS.  How can it be expected to become more commonly used when it's so frigging wobbly and fussy? 

It's no wonder so many people flock to BTCGuild and Ghash.io - they both just work, no messing, no fuss.

Obviously not then.

Oh well, off goes the node again - just spent a day upgrading everything to 13.10 for my new hardware in an effort to run my node again and guess what - it's not compatible with p2pool. Again.

Back to the Guild it is. Adios p2poolers  

https://github.com/blixnood/P2PoolExtendedFrontEnd fixes this.

I dont know why .. it just does.

I get these quite often.  Is this from the miner connections or the Bitcoin-Qt connection?  Is it something I should worry about?

2014-01-16 18:59:38.826198 > Unhandled error in Deferred:
2014-01-16 18:59:38.826283 > Unhandled Error
2014-01-16 18:59:38.826316 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2014-01-16 18:59:38.826344 > Failure: twisted.internet.defer.TimeoutError: in ReplyMatcher

Thanks!

Thanks for the answer theonewhowaskazu.

I used to use the bfgminer one, but it does not support longpoll & I was getting over 30% DOA/stale/rejects with p2pool. Is there a reason why it works with every other pool perfectly well but not p2pool? Seems a bit strange eh?

Peace.

From my experience, it doesn't seem to work with p2pool at all. The BFG one will work, though.

The biggest problem with p2pool is the fact that it reduces my Jupiter's hashrate SIGNIFICANTLY. Hopefully either KNC or P2pool devs will fix that soon.

Anyone? 

P2Pool definitely has more variance than other pools; I'm not sure if it makes sense to say that difficulty changes contribute to P2Pool's variance more than they do to other pools (but I wouldn't be surprised if that were somehow true...)

Difficulty changes definitely effectively "magnify" past variance relative to current earnings, at least.

Good point about the average. 

However, when you factor in the additional variance introduced by high share difficulty and reject rate, and you get more variance than you would elsewhere. 

Yes?

M

Yes. You're assuming that you'll have bad luck now and good luck later, but you have to look at all possible outcomes to calculate what you expect to happen.

Using the average return for your case and the case where you have good luck now and bad luck later happens to be enough for the calculated return to be what it should be:

First period: supposed to mine 1 BTC, mine 1.5 BTC instead (+50% luck)
Second period: supposed to mine 0.5 BTC, mine 0.25 BTC instead (-50% luck)

You made 1.75 BTC, more than expected.


Average of 1.25 BTC and 1.75 BTC = 1.5 BTC, what you're "supposed to mine."

Hello again p2poolers 

OK, decided to switch my node on again after upgrading to 13.10. I'm struggling with getting slush's stratum proxy to play with p2pool so thought I'd ask here - does it work with p2pool? If so, can someone give me a heads up?

Ta muchly 

I was curious why all the p2pool payouts are listed on blockchain's "Strange Transactions" list.

https://blockchain.info/strange-transactions

"Unable to decode input address" 0 BTC

I'll use some extreme numbers for an example.  The numbers will scale either way, I'm using these for simplicity.  I'm ignoring pool fees (lower on p2pool usually than conventional pools), share difficulty increases (doesn't increase on conventional pools), and high rejects on p2pool (doesn't increase on conventional pools).

Let's say for one given BTC difficulty period, according to average, I'm supposed to mine 1 BTC.

That period is awful luck wise.  I only get 50% of what I'm supposed to.  Instead of 1 BTC, I get 0.5 BTC.

The next period, my luck reverses.  I make 50% more than I'm supposed to!  But difficulty also increased 50%.  I'm supposed to make 0.5BTC, on average, but instead I make 0.75BTC.

For those periods, I made a total of 1.25BTC.

On a conventional pool with low variance, I would have made 1.5BTC.

Let's try it with difficulty increasing 30%.

2nd period, my luck reverses.  I'm supposed to make 0.7BTC, instead I make 1.05BTC.

For those two periods, I should have made 1.7BTC.  Instead I made 1.55BTC.  On a conventional pool with low variance, I would be a lot closer to 1.7BTC.

Granted, this is not specific to p2pool.  The same logic applies to any pool with high variance.  What's unique to p2pool is the high share difficulty (increases variance) and rejects (also increases variance).

Is there a flaw in my logic?

M