No that isn't the only difference, the other 2 major problems are:
1) it's python - so it will use more CPU
2) it only uses one thread by default and thus p2pool itself can easily get CPU starved on a machine with 16 cores ...
Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 496. (Read 2591928 times)
August 10, 2013, 06:50:09 PM
August 10, 2013, 06:45:57 PM
An Avalon mining on P2Pool with even 3 modules does indeed take its CPU to the limit. The only real difference between P2Pool and other pools is that P2Pool's generation transaction is much larger. I'm guessing that the bottleneck is hashing the generation transaction ~16 times per second (though that isn't much...). If that's true, perhaps cgminer could be optimized to compress everything before the Stratum nonce to a SHA-256 midstate?
August 10, 2013, 03:16:22 AM
This is the answer.
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
You do understand what the load average figures are telling you, right? It is simply a count of how many processes running on the system needed CPU time per second during that interval, it does not tell you anything at all about the actual CPU time spent servicing those processes.
Eg, if I do a
Code:
while /bin/true; do echo "."; sleep 1; done
The load average will show as 2,
No it won't. The load measures the number of processes using CPU, waiting for CPU or waiting for I/O system calls to complete (basically reads and writes on file descriptors).
even though you can probably see that the actual amount of CPU time spent was likely < 0.001% ?
A high load average may be an indication of the system being CPU starved, but I'd judge "high load average" to be 10-12x the number of CPUs present in the system, depending on the type of processes the machine is running.
A high load average may be an indication of the system being CPU starved, but I'd judge "high load average" to be 10-12x the number of CPUs present in the system, depending on the type of processes the machine is running.
Load > nb of CPU threads may not have anything to do with CPU, just fork large number of processes writing to disk, they won't use much CPU on modern hardware (where every I/O use DMA) but your load will be as high as the number of processes you forked.
In the case of cgminer on Avalon with p2pool, ckolivas already replied in an earlier conversation that p2pool makes cgminer use more CPU than traditional pools. This doesn't show on "normal" CPUs but Avalon has a very weak one.
August 10, 2013, 02:49:36 AM
The difference is staggering. HW error rate dropped from 0.95% to 0.58%, and cpu usage while mining on p2pool went from 90% down to 8% max.
Are you mining directly with stratum to p2pool?Yes.
Code:
root@OpenWrt:~# cgminer --lowmem --avalon-options 115200:32:10:43:300 -o stratum+tcp://192.168.1.77:9332 --api-allow W:127.0.0.1 --api-listen --avalon-cutoff 90 --avalon-temp 70
[2013-08-10 00:44:56] Started cgminer 3.3.1
[2013-08-10 00:44:57] Probing for an alive pool
[2013-08-10 00:44:57] Pool 0 difficulty changed to 82.382325
[2013-08-10 00:44:57] Pool 0 difficulty changed to 128
[2013-08-10 00:44:57] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2013-08-10 00:44:57] Stratum from pool 0 requested work restart
August 10, 2013, 02:16:44 AM
The difference is staggering. HW error rate dropped from 0.95% to 0.58%, and cpu usage while mining on p2pool went from 90% down to 8% max.
Are you mining directly with stratum to p2pool? August 09, 2013, 10:43:52 PM
This is the answer.
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
You do understand what the load average figures are telling you, right? It is simply a count of how many processes running on the system needed CPU time per second during that interval, it does not tell you anything at all about the actual CPU time spent servicing those processes.
Eg, if I do a
Code:
while /bin/true; do echo "."; sleep 1; done
The load average will show as 2, even though you can probably see that the actual amount of CPU time spent was likely < 0.001% ?
A high load average may be an indication of the system being CPU starved, but I'd judge "high load average" to be 10-12x the number of CPUs present in the system, depending on the type of processes the machine is running.
Of course I do.
In this case it is the cgminer process causing that load, just as ebereon suggested.
Tried bfgminer? Works better for me with my little Erupters.
Thanks for the suggestion.
After a bit of tinkering, and with the help of this script http://luke.dashjr.org/tmp/code/avalonhost-raminst, I managed to get the latest bfgminer working on my Avalon.
The difference is staggering. HW error rate dropped from 0.95% to 0.58%, and cpu usage while mining on p2pool went from 90% down to 8% max.
August 09, 2013, 08:36:50 PM
This is the answer.
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
You do understand what the load average figures are telling you, right? It is simply a count of how many processes running on the system needed CPU time per second during that interval, it does not tell you anything at all about the actual CPU time spent servicing those processes.
Eg, if I do a
Code:
while /bin/true; do echo "."; sleep 1; done
The load average will show as 2, even though you can probably see that the actual amount of CPU time spent was likely < 0.001% ?
A high load average may be an indication of the system being CPU starved, but I'd judge "high load average" to be 10-12x the number of CPUs present in the system, depending on the type of processes the machine is running.
August 09, 2013, 04:22:10 PM
Latest cgminer released yesterday has libusb replaced with a version that resolves most historical AMU problems
August 09, 2013, 02:52:21 PM
Tried bfgminer? Works better for me with my little Erupters.
What driver do you use for the erupters with BFGMiner? I have tried WinUSB (zadig) and the Silicon Labs CP210x drivers, and BFGMiner refuses to see either.
August 09, 2013, 02:49:02 PM
Tried bfgminer? Works better for me with my little Erupters.
August 09, 2013, 02:28:27 PM
Are you using the latest 13.2 version of p2pool? Didn't 13.1 have issues with Avalons? Or was that something different?
My node is running from latest git commit:
P2Pool version: 0a3493d
Current local DOA is 5.9% and GBT Latency is < 0.1
Pretty sure the problem is cgminer requiring too many cpu cycles.
August 09, 2013, 02:18:03 PM
Are you using the latest 13.2 version of p2pool? Didn't 13.1 have issues with Avalons? Or was that something different?
August 09, 2013, 12:36:46 PM
Please check the cpu load on your avalon. It is near 80% on my 3 module avalon and it can be 100% on a 4 module. If so, then thats the problem. The cpu is to tiny on the wrt board. If you realy want to use p2pool, then connect the avalon controller usb cable (remove Jumper J1 on the controller board) to a PC/Notebook and run cgminer on it. Everything is controlled by cgminer eg. fans, clocking etc.
This is the answer.
on p2pool, load average: 0.98 0.92 0.87
vs
ozco, load average: 0.19 0.16 0.20
August 09, 2013, 10:55:02 AM
I've tested a few p2pool nodes before... some don't provide work fast enough
not latency related either... CPU issue ^^ like stated above (on the actual machine running p2pool, that is)
not latency related either... CPU issue ^^ like stated above (on the actual machine running p2pool, that is)
August 09, 2013, 06:04:47 AM
Is there anyone running an OC'd four module Avalon on p2pool?
I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
Please check the cpu load on your avalon. It is near 80% on my 3 module avalon and it can be 100% on a 4 module. If so, then thats the problem. The cpu is to tiny on the wrt board. If you realy want to use p2pool, then connect the avalon controller usb cable (remove Jumper J1 on the controller board) to a PC/Notebook and run cgminer on it. Everything is controlled by cgminer eg. fans, clocking etc. I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
August 09, 2013, 04:35:43 AM
Is there anyone running an OC'd four module Avalon on p2pool?
I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
What's your GetBlockLatency like? How fast is the machine running p2pool? To me (not having anywhere near that hashing power) it seems like p2pool isn't able to provide work fast enough?
If you want, you could point your miner at my node for a few minutes (0.25% fee) and see what it reports?
http://847pool.no-ip.biz:9332
August 08, 2013, 04:28:35 PM
Is there anyone running an OC'd four module Avalon on p2pool?
I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
I seem to get the same hashrate (90GH) at 325 as I do at 300, except with more heat and noise.
And I don't think it's a problem with power or cooling because if I switch to a different pool it hashes at around 105GH.
August 08, 2013, 02:00:37 PM
can someone explain how the Efficiency is calculated? is it uptime based or just last n shares or last n time?
Thanks.
It's based on your total amount of shares (since the last time you restarted your p2pool instance) in comparison to the rest of the network. If it's over 100%, you have a better than average orphan/DOA rate. Thanks.
August 08, 2013, 01:31:22 PM
can someone explain how the Efficiency is calculated? is it uptime based or just last n shares or last n time?
Thanks.
Thanks.
August 08, 2013, 09:39:55 AM
Where is the pool node's fee set? In the command line I assume?
Yes, when you run the start command for it, it's a flag. -f 0.25 is 0.25% -f 1.0 is 1%
Ah, cool. Cheers.
On other news, I'm just about to throw some hardware at my node - the Celeron is a piece of crap. I just bought the cheapest OEM PC I could find locally (an Asus with a 3GHz Pentium), which will become my node. Hopefully it'll be a bit more stable...
Jump to: