Author

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 534. (Read 2591920 times)

sr. member
Activity: 454
Merit: 252
twmz, I don't know yet how to do it correctly - if you can advice me with your step-by-step instructions, it will be great.

No, I am not willing to provide step by step instructions, sorry.  The best way to learn is to just try it and figure it out as you go along.  If you don't want to do that, I understand, but then you are probably better off just waiting for the PPA to be updated.

Or use Windows.

M

Or wait 40 minutes...
the ubuntu ppa binaries have been uploaded
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
It's ok it's in Oregon

I welcome everyone to use my public node, very fast and reliable, see signature

i would consider using it if in europe.
full member
Activity: 188
Merit: 100
I welcome everyone to use my public node, very fast and reliable, see signature

i would consider using it if in europe.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
twmz, I don't know yet how to do it correctly - if you can advice me with your step-by-step instructions, it will be great.

No, I am not willing to provide step by step instructions, sorry.  The best way to learn is to just try it and figure it out as you go along.  If you don't want to do that, I understand, but then you are probably better off just waiting for the PPA to be updated.

Or use Windows.

M
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
Make a virtual machine you can screw up and learn on
hero member
Activity: 737
Merit: 500
twmz, I don't know yet how to do it correctly - if you can advice me with your step-by-step instructions, it will be great.

No, I am not willing to provide step by step instructions, sorry.  The best way to learn is to just try it and figure it out as you go along.  If you don't want to do that, I understand, but then you are probably better off just waiting for the PPA to be updated.
sr. member
Activity: 288
Merit: 250
twmz, I don't know yet how to do it correctly - if you can advice me with your step-by-step instructions, it will be great.


Download it from bitcoin.org and install it by hand:
http://bitcoin.org/en/download

UPDATE

Compiling bitcoind/litecoind on Ubuntu Server 13.04

http://bitcointalk.co.za/t/compiling-bitcoind-litecoind-on-ubuntu-server-13-04/44

hero member
Activity: 737
Merit: 500
Can you point me to the correct directory where these files are located? The server does not have any GUI, linux commands from terminal only..

I tried:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install bitcoind

But the system said that I have the latest version (0.8.1, not 0.8.2)

Just replace the files and run as before

Download it from bitcoin.org and install it by hand:

http://bitcoin.org/en/download

sr. member
Activity: 344
Merit: 250
Flixxo - Watch, Share, Earn!
Can you point me to the correct directory where these files are located? The server does not have any GUI, linux commands from terminal only..

I tried:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install bitcoind

But the system said that I have the latest version (0.8.1, not 0.8.2)

Just replace the files and run as before

The ppa is behind :-)
sr. member
Activity: 288
Merit: 250
Can you point me to the correct directory where these files are located? The server does not have any GUI, linux commands from terminal only..

I tried:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install bitcoind

But the system said that I have the latest version (0.8.1, not 0.8.2)

Just replace the files and run as before
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
Just replace the files and run as before
sr. member
Activity: 288
Merit: 250
Newbie question: How to update bitcoind from 0.8.1 to 0.8.2 in Ubuntu 13.04 64-bit server running 11.4 p2pool? Step by step pls..


http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.8.2/

0.8.2 is out of RC and Released into the wild.
legendary
Activity: 1379
Merit: 1003
nec sine labore

Unfortunately, no success...
Blade just do not connect to stratum proxy on p2pool. There is not error message at all.
I would like really to have some developer in it, I can donate my Blade worktime to debug this.

I've made some tests yesterday using cgminer 2.5.10 with a BFL FPGA pointed to the mining proxy (connected to p2pool with forrestv patch) and it does not work if I try using getwork (I get back an error which says that user credentials are wrong).

If I let cgminer switch to stratum, that is if I don't use --fix-protocol then it starts mining without problems.

You can add -P -D to the cgminer command line to see what goes wrong.

I'm running the mining proxy on a fedora 16 pc and cgminer on an ubuntu 12.x server.

spiccioli


That's only your local problem. I am using patched stratum proxy with forrestv patch. Stratum proxy to p2pool works 100% fine with my cgminer, both on getwork and stratum ports.
Blade pointed to that proxy (getwork port) just sits and do nothing, while I am successfully mining with cgminer on it, at same time.

good to know, lenny_, can you tell me the command line you're using to start stratum_mining_proxy.py ?

thanks!

spiccioli
legendary
Activity: 1379
Merit: 1003
nec sine labore
I've made some tests yesterday using cgminer 2.5.10 with a BFL FPGA pointed to the mining proxy (connected to p2pool with forrestv patch) and it does not work if I try using getwork (I get back an error which says that user credentials are wrong).
Maybe update cgminer?

Why should I? Getwork is so old and cgminer 2.5.10 has been released around february this year, maybe I could try an older version of cgminer...

spiccioli
legendary
Activity: 1361
Merit: 1003
Don`t panic! Organize!
I've made some tests yesterday using cgminer 2.5.10 with a BFL FPGA pointed to the mining proxy (connected to p2pool with forrestv patch) and it does not work if I try using getwork (I get back an error which says that user credentials are wrong).
Maybe update cgminer?
legendary
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
DARKNETMARKETS.COM

Unfortunately, no success...
Blade just do not connect to stratum proxy on p2pool. There is not error message at all.
I would like really to have some developer in it, I can donate my Blade worktime to debug this.

I've made some tests yesterday using cgminer 2.5.10 with a BFL FPGA pointed to the mining proxy (connected to p2pool with forrestv patch) and it does not work if I try using getwork (I get back an error which says that user credentials are wrong).

If I let cgminer switch to stratum, that is if I don't use --fix-protocol then it starts mining without problems.

You can add -P -D to the cgminer command line to see what goes wrong.

I'm running the mining proxy on a fedora 16 pc and cgminer on an ubuntu 12.x server.

spiccioli


That's only your local problem. I am using patched stratum proxy with forrestv patch. Stratum proxy to p2pool works 100% fine with my cgminer, both on getwork and stratum ports.
Blade pointed to that proxy (getwork port) just sits and do nothing, while I am successfully mining with cgminer on it, at same time.
legendary
Activity: 1379
Merit: 1003
nec sine labore

Unfortunately, no success...
Blade just do not connect to stratum proxy on p2pool. There is not error message at all.
I would like really to have some developer in it, I can donate my Blade worktime to debug this.

I've made some tests yesterday using cgminer 2.5.10 with a BFL FPGA pointed to the mining proxy (connected to p2pool with forrestv patch) and it does not work if I try using getwork (I get back an error which says that user credentials are wrong).

If I let cgminer switch to stratum, that is if I don't use --fix-protocol then it starts mining without problems.

You can add -P -D to the cgminer command line to see what goes wrong.

I'm running the mining proxy on a fedora 16 pc and cgminer on an ubuntu 12.x server.

spiccioli
full member
Activity: 172
Merit: 100
I have found 70 shares now, 7 orphan and 5 dead, for stale rate of 17.1% (10-28% interval). Pool stale rate is 20.4% now, so efficiency is 104% (90-113% interval).

One thing I remembered was that I have downclocked my CPU to 1.2 GHz from the default clock rate of 2.5 GHz or so to save a little CPU. That might affect things a bit. I might check that at some point.

bitcoind getblocklatency is 0.93 seconds now, so it is much better than the 30 seconds earlier. I think the CPU frequency affects this latency the most, and was likely the reason my latency was 30s with the old bitcoind version.

I've found that the biggest influencer on latency has been the txfee settings. Some people might consider 0.9s latency as still quite high so it might worth trying to tune your txfee settings and see if it comes down even further.

Try setting them to 0.0002 and see if that helps you and then decide if you want to lower it to include more transactions for more fees.
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
I don't know the exact reason why getblocktemplate affected efficiency and even if it's still the case today as forrestv might have changed something that removes this problem. It was still the case very recently (like less than 2 months ago) when getblocktemplate took more than 0.2s. I don't check often how it affects p2pool but I'm doing it right now (in fact I'm studying how the block size and fee limits affect getblocktemplate in the current situation, checking the efficiency is just a bonus). If the behavior of p2pool changed I'll know it in the following days and will be able to update my guide. For now I still recommend to keep it under 0.2s to be safe.

Some recent findings on P2Pool efficiency on my node.

My node is directly connected to the Internet with Ethernet, 100 Mbit/s downstream and 10 Mbit/s upstream. The node is a Phenom four-core processor, with SSD disk. I have 7 mining rigs connected to the node via LAN.

All numbers below are with current (April 2013) P2Pool from Github.

When my configuration was incorrect and Bitcoind could only make outgoing connections, my efficiency was between 95% and 99%.

After fixing the configuration problem, efficiency rose to 110-115% level. I have now 30-40 connections to the Bitcoin network.

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

I have now upgraded to the 0.8.2rc3 version, and the getblocktemplate latency decreased to about 0.1 seconds, but it has increased to 0.9 seconds since the upgrade (in four hours).

Current efficiency after two hours from the upgrade is 102.4%. Well, I think one cannot deduce anything from that yet, maybe the stopping and restarting of bitcoind caused some orphans.

I'll report the efficiency back to this thread after 24 hours have passed with this new bitcoind version.

So, now the pool has run for over 24 hours with the new bitcoind version and:

Code:
# default is 500000, 1000000 is the maximum allowed and will fit more transactions (more fees)
blockmaxsize=1000000
#Fee-per-kilobyte amount (in BTC) considered the same as "free"
#Be careful setting this: if you set it to zero then
#a transaction spammer can cheaply fill blocks using
#1-satoshi-fee transactions. It should be set above the real
#cost to you of processing a transaction.
mintxfee=0.00001
# Same but for relaying the tx to our peers
minrelaytxfee=0.00001

settings.

I have found 70 shares now, 7 orphan and 5 dead, for stale rate of 17.1% (10-28% interval). Pool stale rate is 20.4% now, so efficiency is 104% (90-113% interval).

One thing I remembered was that I have downclocked my CPU to 1.2 GHz from the default clock rate of 2.5 GHz or so to save a little CPU. That might affect things a bit. I might check that at some point.

bitcoind getblocklatency is 0.93 seconds now, so it is much better than the 30 seconds earlier. I think the CPU frequency affects this latency the most, and was likely the reason my latency was 30s with the old bitcoind version.
no need to downclock, thats sutpid!
newbie
Activity: 29
Merit: 0
I don't know the exact reason why getblocktemplate affected efficiency and even if it's still the case today as forrestv might have changed something that removes this problem. It was still the case very recently (like less than 2 months ago) when getblocktemplate took more than 0.2s. I don't check often how it affects p2pool but I'm doing it right now (in fact I'm studying how the block size and fee limits affect getblocktemplate in the current situation, checking the efficiency is just a bonus). If the behavior of p2pool changed I'll know it in the following days and will be able to update my guide. For now I still recommend to keep it under 0.2s to be safe.

Some recent findings on P2Pool efficiency on my node.

My node is directly connected to the Internet with Ethernet, 100 Mbit/s downstream and 10 Mbit/s upstream. The node is a Phenom four-core processor, with SSD disk. I have 7 mining rigs connected to the node via LAN.

All numbers below are with current (April 2013) P2Pool from Github.

When my configuration was incorrect and Bitcoind could only make outgoing connections, my efficiency was between 95% and 99%.

After fixing the configuration problem, efficiency rose to 110-115% level. I have now 30-40 connections to the Bitcoin network.

When the getblocktemplate latency started to appear, my efficiency was still between 110-115%. My getblocktemplate latency was about 30 seconds at that time.

I have now upgraded to the 0.8.2rc3 version, and the getblocktemplate latency decreased to about 0.1 seconds, but it has increased to 0.9 seconds since the upgrade (in four hours).

Current efficiency after two hours from the upgrade is 102.4%. Well, I think one cannot deduce anything from that yet, maybe the stopping and restarting of bitcoind caused some orphans.

I'll report the efficiency back to this thread after 24 hours have passed with this new bitcoind version.

So, now the pool has run for over 24 hours with the new bitcoind version and:

Code:
# default is 500000, 1000000 is the maximum allowed and will fit more transactions (more fees)
blockmaxsize=1000000
#Fee-per-kilobyte amount (in BTC) considered the same as "free"
#Be careful setting this: if you set it to zero then
#a transaction spammer can cheaply fill blocks using
#1-satoshi-fee transactions. It should be set above the real
#cost to you of processing a transaction.
mintxfee=0.00001
# Same but for relaying the tx to our peers
minrelaytxfee=0.00001

settings.

I have found 70 shares now, 7 orphan and 5 dead, for stale rate of 17.1% (10-28% interval). Pool stale rate is 20.4% now, so efficiency is 104% (90-113% interval).

One thing I remembered was that I have downclocked my CPU to 1.2 GHz from the default clock rate of 2.5 GHz or so to save a little CPU. That might affect things a bit. I might check that at some point.

bitcoind getblocklatency is 0.93 seconds now, so it is much better than the 30 seconds earlier. I think the CPU frequency affects this latency the most, and was likely the reason my latency was 30s with the old bitcoind version.
Jump to: