[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 649.

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 21, 2012, 05:58:44 AM

Quote from: twmz on August 20, 2012, 08:42:14 PM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:09:45 PM

What's up with block 194900?

Looks like we found it twice, and of now (43 minutes after the last one), still haven't been payed for it?

Double orphan on the same block? Sad

M

One of them is orphaned and the other is not. It's a rare glitch on p2pool.info that causes it to not appear orphaned until 2 hours later only when the pool finds two blocks with the same height that are competing. Later tonight, it will fix itself and one of them will appear orphaned.

We orphaned our own block though? And I still get payout for that block..

M

yes, we had two blocks in competition for a while. It looks like both were actually extended by others and it wasn't until the 194902 height that one of them "won" and the other was orhpaned. You should have gotten a payment for the one that "won" (assuming you had at least 1 share prior to the block being found) and not for the orphaned block. However, you may have a transaction with 0 confirmations in your transaction log for the orphaned block. That's normal. It will never get confirmed and so you might as well just ignore it.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: twmz on August 20, 2012, 08:42:14 PM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:09:45 PM

What's up with block 194900?

Looks like we found it twice, and of now (43 minutes after the last one), still haven't been payed for it?

Double orphan on the same block? Sad

M

One of them is orphaned and the other is not. It's a rare glitch on p2pool.info that causes it to not appear orphaned until 2 hours later only when the pool finds two blocks with the same height that are competing. Later tonight, it will fix itself and one of them will appear orphaned.

We orphaned our own block though? And I still get payout for that block..

M

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:21:11 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 08:07:49 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

I do think we have a scaling issue.

I'm not so sure, a week is not enough to know, p2pool took 8 month to have a 90 days positive pool luck index.

spiccioli

"6 weeks of no bad L" ... except for that period when we had an extra 200g/h. Seems pretty convincing to me.

M

So when I toss a coin in the air and call out "HEADS", and it lands on heads, that's pretty convincing that I can control a coin toss?

Look, shares start out at 10 seconds on average. When the hashrate goes up, difficulty goes up, and share rate goes to ... 10 seconds on average. "bad luck" is not caused by an increased hashrate.

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:09:45 PM

What's up with block 194900?

Looks like we found it twice, and of now (43 minutes after the last one), still haven't been payed for it?

Double orphan on the same block? Sad

M

One of them is orphaned and the other is not. It's a rare glitch on p2pool.info that causes it to not appear orphaned until 2 hours later only when the pool finds two blocks with the same height that are competing. Later tonight, it will fix itself and one of them will appear orphaned.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

What's up with block 194900?

Looks like we found it twice, and of now (43 minutes after the last one), still haven't been payed for it?

Double orphan on the same block? Sad

M

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 09:29:14 AM

Quote from: organofcorti on August 20, 2012, 09:14:33 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:57:05 AM

I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding, and I probably worded it poorly. The chart is probably fine. It's your quote about "no bad luck in 6 weeks". I'm guessing you're looking at the large scheme of things? We had three instances in the last 14 days where it took > 24 hours for a block. 7 day luck dropped below 90% not that long ago. What exactly do you mean by no bad luck?

M

I follow. You're looking at the 7 day rolling mean at p2Pool.info? That's not quite the same as the weekly average chart I produce. Mine is just the week's average luck. It's more useful than the 7 day rolling mean when analysing long term trends. If you average the last 7 weeks data, the average round shares / difficulty is less than 1. This means better than average luck. But the weekly averages don't have the granularity to find small intraweek drops in luck, for which a 7 day rolling mean is more suited.

Even so, for investigating what you're interested in neither is as good a simple correlation analysis. I did that when I wrote the p2Pool Neighbourhood Pool Watch post and didn't find a correlation between hashrate and round length. I can do it again if miners here really think there's a problem. I honestly can't see how increasing the hashrate would increase the probability of more than averge shares to solve a round though. An increase in orphans maybe, and even then there wasn't a significant correlation when last I checked.

So, you're saying long term analysis indicates that p2pool is coming out ahead, but no one else is? I was always under the impression that every pool, if you look at it long enough, will balance out to "in luck".

M

I'm saying that the average (round length)/difficulty < 1 for the last 7 weeks. If you want to try for yourself, take the total shares per round, divide by difficulty and take the mean.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: organofcorti on August 20, 2012, 09:14:33 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:57:05 AM

I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding, and I probably worded it poorly. The chart is probably fine. It's your quote about "no bad luck in 6 weeks". I'm guessing you're looking at the large scheme of things? We had three instances in the last 14 days where it took > 24 hours for a block. 7 day luck dropped below 90% not that long ago. What exactly do you mean by no bad luck?

M

I follow. You're looking at the 7 day rolling mean at p2Pool.info? That's not quite the same as the weekly average chart I produce. Mine is just the week's average luck. It's more useful than the 7 day rolling mean when analysing long term trends. If you average the last 7 weeks data, the average round shares / difficulty is less than 1. This means better than average luck. But the weekly averages don't have the granularity to find small intraweek drops in luck, for which a 7 day rolling mean is more suited.

Even so, for investigating what you're interested in neither is as good a simple correlation analysis. I did that when I wrote the p2Pool Neighbourhood Pool Watch post and didn't find a correlation between hashrate and round length. I can do it again if miners here really think there's a problem. I honestly can't see how increasing the hashrate would increase the probability of more than averge shares to solve a round though. An increase in orphans maybe, and even then there wasn't a significant correlation when last I checked.

So, you're saying long term analysis indicates that p2pool is coming out ahead, but no one else is? I was always under the impression that every pool, if you look at it long enough, will balance out to "in luck".

M

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:57:05 AM

Quote from: organofcorti on August 20, 2012, 08:39:46 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

I take comments like this seriously. If you show me and explain exactly which data is inaccurate and I'll fix it immediately.

I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding, and I probably worded it poorly. The chart is probably fine. It's your quote about "no bad luck in 6 weeks". I'm guessing you're looking at the large scheme of things? We had three instances in the last 14 days where it took > 24 hours for a block. 7 day luck dropped below 90% not that long ago. What exactly do you mean by no bad luck?

M

I follow. You're looking at the 7 day rolling mean at p2Pool.info? That's not quite the same as the weekly average chart I produce. Mine is just the week's average luck. It's more useful than the 7 day rolling mean when analysing long term trends. If you average the last 7 weeks data, the average round shares / difficulty is less than 1. This means better than average luck. But the weekly averages don't have the granularity to find small intraweek drops in luck, for which a 7 day rolling mean is more suited.

Even so, for investigating what you're interested in neither is as good a simple correlation analysis. I did that when I wrote the p2Pool Neighbourhood Pool Watch post and didn't find a correlation between hashrate and round length. I can do it again if miners here really think there's a problem. I honestly can't see how increasing the hashrate would increase the probability of more than averge shares to solve a round though. An increase in orphans maybe, and even then there wasn't a significant correlation when last I checked.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: organofcorti on August 20, 2012, 08:39:46 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

I take comments like this seriously. If you show me and explain exactly which data is inaccurate and I'll fix it immediately.

I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding, and I probably worded it poorly. The chart is probably fine. It's your quote about "no bad luck in 6 weeks". I'm guessing you're looking at the large scheme of things? We had three instances in the last 14 days where it took > 24 hours for a block. 7 day luck dropped below 90% not that long ago. What exactly do you mean by no bad luck?

M

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 01:58:46 AM

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

I take comments like this seriously. If you show me and explain exactly which data is inaccurate and I'll fix it immediately.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: kjj on August 20, 2012, 08:29:37 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:21:11 AM

"6 weeks of no bad L" ... except for that period when we had an extra 200g/h. Seems pretty convincing to me.

You weren't paying attention. The run of bad luck started before the rate jumped.

While it is still possible that we had a little initial bad luck, then luck returned to normal at the exact moment that we had a scaling problem, it is quite a stretch to call that convincing.

Apparently the owner of that hash rate was convinced enough.

M

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1026

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:21:11 AM

"6 weeks of no bad L" ... except for that period when we had an extra 200g/h. Seems pretty convincing to me.

You weren't paying attention. The run of bad luck started before the rate jumped.

While it is still possible that we had a little initial bad luck, then luck returned to normal at the exact moment that we had a scaling problem, it is quite a stretch to call that convincing.

spiccioli

legendary

Activity: 1379

Merit: 1003

nec sine labore

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 08:21:11 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 08:07:49 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 01:58:46 AM

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

Since that user left, things have returned to normal.

I do think we have a scaling issue.

M

I'm not so sure, a week is not enough to know, p2pool took 8 month to have a 90 days positive pool luck index.

spiccioli

"6 weeks of no bad L" ... except for that period when we had an extra 200g/h. Seems pretty convincing to me.

M

No, it is "6 weeks of no bad L" including that period.

Maybe those extra 200 GH/s made p2pool bad luck last only a week instead of a month... who can say for sure?

spiccioli

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 08:07:49 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 01:58:46 AM

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

Since that user left, things have returned to normal.

I do think we have a scaling issue.

M

I'm not so sure, a week is not enough to know, p2pool took 8 month to have a 90 days positive pool luck index.

spiccioli

"6 weeks of no bad L" ... except for that period when we had an extra 200g/h. Seems pretty convincing to me.

M

spiccioli

legendary

Activity: 1379

Merit: 1003

nec sine labore

Quote from: mdude77 on August 20, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 01:58:46 AM

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

Since that user left, things have returned to normal.

I do think we have a scaling issue.

M

I'm not so sure, a week is not enough to know, p2pool took 8 month to have a 90 days positive pool luck index.

spiccioli

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: spiccioli on August 20, 2012, 01:58:46 AM

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

That chart isn't entirely accurate. Things went sour when the extra 200g/h was added. Yes, we did have one ridiculously good day when we got like 10 blocks, but most other days were not as good as they should have been when we were almost double the hash rate.

Since that user left, things have returned to normal.

I do think we have a scaling issue.

M

spiccioli

legendary

Activity: 1379

Merit: 1003

nec sine labore

I'd like to stress out what

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1112365

tells about p2pool!

It has the 'L' word in it...

spiccioli

tiberiandusk

hero member

Activity: 575

Merit: 500

The North Remembers

Quote from: rav3n_pl on August 19, 2012, 08:56:06 AM

Quote from: tiberiandusk on August 18, 2012, 11:41:06 PM

I have a three core CPU and there's nothing going on in the background. It seems to run fine for about a day then it starts messing up.

What version of bitcoin? 0.6.2 has a huge cpu usage bug.

I'm using 0.6.3

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1026

Quote from: Naelr on August 19, 2012, 10:28:39 AM

So what happens if I get no shares for a block on BTC does that also mean no shares on namecoin?

Namecoin is not pooled.

If you are running a local namecoind instance, your namecoin earnings, if any, go straight into that wallet. Namecoin difficulty is currently at about a million, so don't expect a whole lot if you are a smaller operation. I think my moderately sized p2pool setup is picking up a namecoin block every other month, on average.

Naelr

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 100

Quote from: zvs on August 16, 2012, 11:41:44 AM

Quote from: Naelr on August 16, 2012, 11:38:35 AM

Quote from: zvs on August 16, 2012, 10:57:27 AM

Quote from: Naelr on August 16, 2012, 10:55:55 AM

Quote from: zvs on August 16, 2012, 10:54:29 AM

Quote from: Naelr on August 16, 2012, 10:53:20 AM

OK when merged mining on p2pool where do the namecoins go?

so I login with cgminer -o http://localhost:9332 -u my payout address -p x

so how does node know where to send namecoins? do I have to do another switch with namecoin ? I am currently searching for this answer but nothing has turned up yet... perhaps my google-fu today is off the mark...

thanks

Naelr

it seems to just pull it directly from your namecoin client.. i was searching for the same thing, but after solving a block, i also had the namecoin merged stuff incoming as well (w/o doing anything extra)

But if I don't have a namecoin client running on same machine with the BTC client/wallet ... how does it know.. do they just go poof?

Oh, yeah... if you don't have namecoind or w/e running, yeah, you can't do the merged mining.... same with i0coin, ixcoin, and devcoin

Ok so on the machine doing the mining (edit:or where the BTC wallet is) not the p2pool server I need to have a BTC client and namecoin client ... start mining with the BTC client payout and the namecoin will just show up in the namecoin client? just wanna get this straight...

it needs to be on the p2pool server, standard p2pool *server doesn't distribute merged mining rewards, it takes it all for itself

So what happens if I get no shares for a block on BTC does that also mean no shares on namecoin?

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 649. (Read 2591920 times)