[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 653.

Krak

hero member

Activity: 591

Merit: 500

Quote from: forrestv on August 13, 2012, 01:03:03 AM

I urge larger miners to use /3000 or higher in order to keep the variance down for smaller P2Pool miners. This will increase the difficulty of your shares to 3000, but each share is worth proportionally more. Simply append /3000 to the end of your miners' usernames. This will keep share difficulty (and consequentially, variance) low for small miners.

Also, don't worry, because no value is too high for either pseudoshare (+) or share (/) difficulty. P2Pool will ignore values of + that would cause it to drop shares otherwise, and the / value is capped at 10x the current minimum(default) share difficulty.

Ahh, so right now ~10,000 is the highest difficulty allowed? Damn. My share variance is starting to hurt pretty bad. Undecided

Red Emerald

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Quote from: pyramining on August 12, 2012, 06:04:57 PM

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

I'm not blaming you and sincerely hope that you being part of the pool is a good thing. I'm just wanting to make sure its luck and not a bug or something. With today, it's looking like it was just a run of bad luck.

forrestv

hero member

Activity: 516

Merit: 643

The + option (pseudoshare difficulty) is indeed disabled for the Bitcoin P2Pool due to me being paranoid, though that shouldn't be a large issue.

Quote from: JayCoin on August 12, 2012, 09:29:04 PM

The other option (/) doesn't seem to be currently implemented anywhere (I PMd forrestv to find out about this)

The / option (share difficulty) is still there, though:

In work.py:

Code:

        desired_share_target = 2**256 - 1
        if '/' in user:
            user, min_diff_str = user.rsplit('/', 1)
            try:
                desired_share_target = bitcoin_data.difficulty_to_target(float(min_diff_str))
            except:
                pass

...

Code:

                desired_timestamp=int(time.time() - self.current_work.value['clock_offset']),
                desired_target=desired_share_target,
                ref_merkle_link=dict(branch=[], index=0),

I urge larger miners to use /3000 or higher in order to keep the variance down for smaller P2Pool miners. This will increase the difficulty of your shares to 3000, but each share is worth proportionally more. Simply append /3000 to the end of your miners' usernames. This will keep share difficulty (and consequentially, variance) low for small miners.

Also, don't worry, because no value is too high for either pseudoshare (+) or share (/) difficulty. P2Pool will ignore values of + that would cause it to drop shares otherwise, and the / value is capped at 10x the current minimum(default) share difficulty.

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 07:58:30 PM

See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.816322 for recommended values.

How are the values you linked to "recommended"? What's the advantage of using them?

It look like D&T is trying to provide a guide based on what is probably best to worst in terms of variance, but no values are given. So how do you make a selection?

racerguy

sr. member

Activity: 270

Merit: 250

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 07:07:43 PM

Quote from: rav3n_pl on August 12, 2012, 06:32:50 PM

This is odd. My payout was usually mostly around 0.02 to top 0.05 per block when rate was 200-250GH and share diff about 500.
Now pool rate is 400-450GH, share diff about 900 and my payout wend down to 0.007 per block and p2pool.info shows me as 53MH. It is over triple less (not double like it "should").
Something is going terribly wrong when pool rate increased, worst thing is we are not finding much more blocks! I hope it will resolve automagially in next 2-3 days.
Maybe adding optional 10x higher share diff for >1GH pool users? As far I understand payout is calculated from number AND diff of share in chain? Ie share on diff 2000 is worth 2x shares diff 1000? This will decrease "spamming" sharechain by biggest miners.
I`m pretty small miner 190MH tops.

This is my point exactly!! We're getting less blocks and less payout!

M

True we got less blocks this week but i don't think it's anything outside of normal expected variance.

JayCoin

sr. member

Activity: 409

Merit: 251

Crypt'n Since 2011

Quote from: 420 on August 12, 2012, 07:15:06 PM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 07:08:19 PM

Quote from: pyramining on August 12, 2012, 06:04:57 PM

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

Have you adjusted the difficulty to compensate for your high horsepower?

M

you can set manual difficulty with p2pool?

You can adjust difficulty by making the miner's user name + for example: username+1

This would be useful to decrease the load on your p2pool node on big time hashrate miners.

You would not want to increase share difficulty above p2pool share chain difficulty or a miner may discard work that could have been added to the p2pool share chain.

This has been disabled in recent versions because forrestv thought the shares that where not difficulty 1 would screw up some mining programs.

To allow this to work, you need to edit the p2pool/bitcoin/networks.py file. On line 26 change:

Code:

SANE_TARGET_RANGE=(2**256//2**32 - 1, 2**256//2**32 - 1),

To:

Code:

SANE_TARGET_RANGE=(2**256//2**64 - 1, 2**256//2**32 - 1),

The other option (/) doesn't seem to be currently implemented anywhere (I PMd forrestv to find out about this)

CGMiner doesn't seem to be affected by different share difficulties from the tests I have done. That is all I can vouch for.

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: 420 on August 12, 2012, 07:15:06 PM

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 07:08:19 PM

Quote from: pyramining on August 12, 2012, 06:04:57 PM

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

Have you adjusted the difficulty to compensate for your high horsepower?

M

you can set manual difficulty with p2pool?

From https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool:

Code:

Appending "/1000" to a miner's username will increase the difficulty of producing a P2Pool share to at most 1000. This is useful to large miners because doing this can make it easier for small miners while minimally impacting the large miners themselves. See recommended values.

    Appending "+1" (for example) after that will make P2Pool always give your miners work with a difficulty of 1

See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.816322 for recommended values.

M

420

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 07:08:19 PM

Quote from: pyramining on August 12, 2012, 06:04:57 PM

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

Have you adjusted the difficulty to compensate for your high horsepower?

M

you can set manual difficulty with p2pool?

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: pyramining on August 12, 2012, 06:04:57 PM

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

Have you adjusted the difficulty to compensate for your high horsepower?

M

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: rav3n_pl on August 12, 2012, 06:32:50 PM

This is odd. My payout was usually mostly around 0.02 to top 0.05 per block when rate was 200-250GH and share diff about 500.
Now pool rate is 400-450GH, share diff about 900 and my payout wend down to 0.007 per block and p2pool.info shows me as 53MH. It is over triple less (not double like it "should").
Something is going terribly wrong when pool rate increased, worst thing is we are not finding much more blocks! I hope it will resolve automagially in next 2-3 days.
Maybe adding optional 10x higher share diff for >1GH pool users? As far I understand payout is calculated from number AND diff of share in chain? Ie share on diff 2000 is worth 2x shares diff 1000? This will decrease "spamming" sharechain by biggest miners.
I`m pretty small miner 190MH tops.

This is my point exactly!! We're getting less blocks and less payout!

M

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 11:27:56 AM

Any chance p2pool could be changed to auto adjust the share difficulty to a given miner based on hash rate? I know I haven't taken the time to figure out what my ideal share difficulty is, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Here's some 95% confidence intervals for daily shares submitted:
1000 shares/day: ~ +/- 6%
500 shares/day: ~ +/- 9%
250 shares/day: ~ +/- 14%
125 shares/day: ~ +/- 17%
60 shares/day: ~ +/- 25%

1. Select a target number of shares to be submitted based on a payout variance you can live with (say 500 shares/day = 9%).
2. Work out the number of difficulty 1 shares you'd submit in a day (at 2.4 Ghps, that would be about 48280 diff 1 shares).
3. Divide number of diff 1 shares by the daily shares selected in step 1. In this example, 48280/500 = 98, so in this case a difficulty of 100 would be a good selection.

I'll post a longer list with better granularity if anyone find this useful.

rav3n_pl

legendary

Activity: 1361

Merit: 1003

Don`t panic! Organize!

This is odd. My payout was usually mostly around 0.02 to top 0.05 per block when rate was 200-250GH and share diff about 500.
Now pool rate is 400-450GH, share diff about 900 and my payout wend down to 0.007 per block and p2pool.info shows me as 53MH. It is over triple less (not double like it "should").
Something is going terribly wrong when pool rate increased, worst thing is we are not finding much more blocks! I hope it will resolve automagially in next 2-3 days.
Maybe adding optional 10x higher share diff for >1GH pool users? As far I understand payout is calculated from number AND diff of share in chain? Ie share on diff 2000 is worth 2x shares diff 1000? This will decrease "spamming" sharechain by biggest miners.
I`m pretty small miner 190MH tops.

pyramining

hero member

Activity: 501

Merit: 500

If you think that my entry in p2pool is breaking up things, I can move my miners to solo-mining. I'm talking of around 250GH/s.

I joined having in mind to help p2pool to perform better, not to upset people.

eightbitbandit

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

Quote from: eightbitbandit on June 19, 2012, 09:22:58 AM

Quote from: Subo1977 on June 19, 2012, 09:19:03 AM

Quote from: eightbitbandit on June 19, 2012, 09:15:23 AM

Quote from: Subo1977 on June 19, 2012, 09:09:50 AM

Quote from: eightbitbandit on June 19, 2012, 09:02:39 AM

Did the latest update up the ram requirement significantly? I've had oom-killer kill the python process twice in 24hrs. I restarted it again this morning and it's already back up to 350mb. This box only has 1gb total, but it's had no problem running p2pool for weeks uninterrupted before. I finally just put an entry in crontab to restart the thing every 6 hrs.

on my Ubuntu-Server with 4GB Ram bitcoind use 2.6% and Pyhthon 2.5% Memory

Odd. Our bitcoind's are only off by about 20mb, but my p2pool is using around 200mb more. I'm using the latest git pulls of both (as of yesterday anyway).

This is a Fedora 17 32bit box, if that matters.

Did you patch the Fedora yesterday?

I actually just did a few mins ago, but I haven't rebooted to apply the new kernel yet. According to my yum.log, my last python update was on June 03, to 2.7.3-3. Most of the stuff it pulled down today involved dhclient, perl, and the kernel.

For what it's worth, Fedora patched python on Aug 10th and my ballooning RAM dependencies disappeared. I'm holding steady at about 90mb, which is less than my instance of bitcoind (about 100mb). Just thought I'd drop a note to let others know. It's possible they fixed it earlier, because I updated to 2.7.3-7, vs the 2.7.3-3 I was having problems with. I just had a cron running every six hours that restarted my p2pool instance to keep things in check, heh.

Red Emerald

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 11:27:56 AM

It's not just the stats. It's the results. I know past results aren't a guarantee of the future.. but I'm seeing an awful lot of red, literally, because rounds are taking too long. We used to get more blocks, and higher payouts. Now it's less blocks, and smaller payouts. That's a double whammy.

And it all started when the extra 120 g/h was added.

I'm hoping it's a bad streak.. but I have yet to see anyone indicate for sure that we don't have a scaling issue.

Any chance p2pool could be changed to auto adjust the share difficulty to a given miner based on hash rate? I know I haven't taken the time to figure out what my ideal share difficulty is, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

M

+1

It seems like we had our luck problem come up last time when the pool grew from 200 to 300 GH/s. Maybe there is a scaling issue.

randomguy7

hero member

Activity: 527

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 11:33:45 AM

Quote from: randomguy7 on August 12, 2012, 11:23:37 AM

My p2pool efficiency is only about 93%, someone has a clue what the reason for this could be?

I run my p2pool instance on a server with 100mbit/s connection, my latency to the server is about 20ms.
My miners are cgminer (with icarus boards) and btcminer (with ztex quads).
I rarely run any downloads on my local link to avoid an increase of latency and thereby stales. I even have qos set up to prefer my miners traffic to the normal web traffic while surfing. But efficiency still sucks hard.
Any ideas what else I could try?

For efficiency rate to be that low, it means your stale rate is pretty high. Right?

I run two p2pools, on two different machines, with non standard ports. I have them linked to each other with "-n". I have my firewall set to forward both nonstandard ports to the respective pools. My stale rate is ~5%, which right now gives me ~104% efficiency. Right now I have 24 connections on one, and 11 on the other (was just restarted a few hours ago).

I've also found if I run p2pool on a machine with only one core (processor), my stale rate increases significantly.

Maybe that'll help.

M

That's interesting, all three boxes (2 dedi servers, and my local miner box) I tried p2pool on had only one cpu core.

My stale rate usually isn't very high (the difficulty 1 shares), but the shares which meet the difficulty of the p2pool share chain have a higher stale rate than the pool average. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me but that are my numbers.

Krak

hero member

Activity: 591

Merit: 500

Quote from: mdude77 on August 12, 2012, 11:27:56 AM

Any chance p2pool could be changed to auto adjust the share difficulty to a given miner based on hash rate? I know I haven't taken the time to figure out what my ideal share difficulty is, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Take a look here. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.816322

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: randomguy7 on August 12, 2012, 11:23:37 AM

My p2pool efficiency is only about 93%, someone has a clue what the reason for this could be?

I run my p2pool instance on a server with 100mbit/s connection, my latency to the server is about 20ms.
My miners are cgminer (with icarus boards) and btcminer (with ztex quads).
I rarely run any downloads on my local link to avoid an increase of latency and thereby stales. I even have qos set up to prefer my miners traffic to the normal web traffic while surfing. But efficiency still sucks hard.
Any ideas what else I could try?

For efficiency rate to be that low, it means your stale rate is pretty high. Right?

I run two p2pools, on two different machines, with non standard ports. I have them linked to each other with "-n". I have my firewall set to forward both nonstandard ports to the respective pools. My stale rate is ~5%, which right now gives me ~104% efficiency. Right now I have 24 connections on one, and 11 on the other (was just restarted a few hours ago).

I've also found if I run p2pool on a machine with only one core (processor), my stale rate increases significantly.

Maybe that'll help.

M

Krak

hero member

Activity: 591

Merit: 500

Quote from: randomguy7 on August 12, 2012, 11:23:37 AM

My p2pool efficiency is only about 93%, someone has a clue what the reason for this could be?

I run my p2pool instance on a server with 100mbit/s connection, my latency to the server is about 20ms.
My miners are cgminer (with icarus boards) and btcminer (with ztex quads).
I rarely run any downloads on my local link to avoid an increase of latency and thereby stales. I even have qos set up to prefer my miners traffic to the normal web traffic while surfing. But efficiency still sucks hard.
Any ideas what else I could try?

Try setting a cap on your incoming connections with --max-conns. I've noticed that nodes with a lot of incoming connections actually have higher dead/orphan rates than nodes with lower connections (I set my max connections to 5 and I almost always have perfect efficiency).

mdude77

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Quote from: organofcorti on August 12, 2012, 09:36:27 AM

I should have thought of that, twmz. Yes, I take "now", subtract 7 days and include only rounds completed in that time. So i missed that stonking great round. Good news is your stats will show a much improved 7 day luck shortly

Which just goes to show that the 7 day luck isn't something mdude77 shouldn't be basing his mining decisions on just the last weeks rounds - the variance in such a short period of time can be huge.

It's not just the stats. It's the results. I know past results aren't a guarantee of the future.. but I'm seeing an awful lot of red, literally, because rounds are taking too long. We used to get more blocks, and higher payouts. Now it's less blocks, and smaller payouts. That's a double whammy.

And it all started when the extra 120 g/h was added.

I'm hoping it's a bad streak.. but I have yet to see anyone indicate for sure that we don't have a scaling issue.

Any chance p2pool could be changed to auto adjust the share difficulty to a given miner based on hash rate? I know I haven't taken the time to figure out what my ideal share difficulty is, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

M

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 653. (Read 2591920 times)