[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 71.

tubexc

hero member

Activity: 496

Merit: 500

Renting hashrate and listening :
Jennifer Lopez - Jenny from the Block - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dly6p4Fu5TE Grin

veqtrus

member

Activity: 107

Merit: 10

Quote from: flameruk on December 29, 2016, 05:56:04 PM

I will go with classic as in my mind it's a better solution to Segwit and cores principles.

I'm not going to argue about whether or not SegWit is good but once it is certain that it will activate P2Pool will have to fork to produce SegWit blocks and if your node doesn't support it by then you will be forked off the P2Pool network.

in2tactics

hero member

Activity: 578

Merit: 501

Quote from: flameruk on December 29, 2016, 05:56:04 PM

Quote from: flameruk on December 26, 2016, 07:22:33 AM

Hi folks. Is there any issue running classic as the backend for P2Pool or does it need to be core?
Just I am upgrading a rack server this week at work during the holiday and the old box will be reprovisioned as a uk node.
Something I've wanted to do for a while to lower my latency and we have a direct Ethernet comnection at work so probably makes sense.

Thanks for the info.

I will go with classic as in my mind it's a better solution to Segwit and cores principles.
Please don't thrash me over this one. I'm still reading about Segwit but it seems to begin to steer ownership towards core of the network.

The new hardware never arrived this week so I'll have to wait a couple more days into the new year.
I hashed up Ubuntu on an old office PC and started to get things working but nah the processors having none of it.
Until then I'll keep mining to another node.

I do not think anyone cares which software you use. It is more important that you properly configure your node for quick block submission and for optimal transaction payout versus worrying over SegWit support yes or no.

flameruk

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: flameruk on December 26, 2016, 07:22:33 AM

Hi folks. Is there any issue running classic as the backend for P2Pool or does it need to be core?
Just I am upgrading a rack server this week at work during the holiday and the old box will be reprovisioned as a uk node.
Something I've wanted to do for a while to lower my latency and we have a direct Ethernet comnection at work so probably makes sense.

Thanks for the info.

I will go with classic as in my mind it's a better solution to Segwit and cores principles.
Please don't thrash me over this one. I'm still reading about Segwit but it seems to begin to steer ownership towards core of the network.

The new hardware never arrived this week so I'll have to wait a couple more days into the new year.
I hashed up Ubuntu on an old office PC and started to get things working but nah the processors having none of it.
Until then I'll keep mining to another node.

KorbinDallas

newbie

Activity: 55

Merit: 0

Whoa! 10 PH/s Shocked

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: veqtrus on December 27, 2016, 07:09:41 AM

Quote from: windpath on December 26, 2016, 08:19:57 PM

Thanks for the heads up, but can you clarify what the new version from you commit signals for?

Code:

version=max(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x20000000),

0x20000000 is BIP9 with no deployment bits set. If some are set the version will be larger; therefore the version should always be at least 0x20000000 (what my code does).

Edit: This means that whatever BIP9 compatible version bitcoind is suggesting will be used as is.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify, and appreciate your contribution. So basically P2Pool will signal for whatever flavor of Bitcoin client you are running signals for...

veqtrus

member

Activity: 107

Merit: 10

Quote from: windpath on December 26, 2016, 08:19:57 PM

Thanks for the heads up, but can you clarify what the new version from you commit signals for?

Code:

version=max(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x20000000),

0x20000000 is BIP9 with no deployment bits set. If some are set the version will be larger; therefore the version should always be at least 0x20000000 (what my code does).

Edit: This means that whatever BIP9 compatible version bitcoind is suggesting will be used as is.

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: veqtrus on December 26, 2016, 12:41:38 PM

Quote from: windpath on December 26, 2016, 09:28:24 AM

Quote from: flameruk on December 26, 2016, 07:22:33 AM

... classic as the backend for P2Pool ...

You need to change the block version in the P2Pool source code, it's line 372 in work.py, to:

...

This is no longer needed.

Thanks for the heads up, but can you clarify what the new version from you commit signals for?

Code:

version=max(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x20000000),

veqtrus

member

Activity: 107

Merit: 10

Quote from: windpath on December 26, 2016, 09:28:24 AM

Quote from: flameruk on December 26, 2016, 07:22:33 AM

... classic as the backend for P2Pool ...

You need to change the block version in the P2Pool source code, it's line 372 in work.py, to:

...

This is no longer needed.

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: flameruk on December 26, 2016, 07:22:33 AM

Hi folks. Is there any issue running classic as the backend for P2Pool or does it need to be core?
Just I am upgrading a rack server this week at work during the holiday and the old box will be reprovisioned as a uk node.
Something I've wanted to do for a while to lower my latency and we have a direct Ethernet comnection at work so probably makes sense.

You need to change the block version in the P2Pool source code, it's line 372 in work.py, to:

Code:

Code:

version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x30000000),

or

Code:

Code:

version=min(self.current_work.value['version'], 805306368),

Both work.

flameruk

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Hi folks. Is there any issue running classic as the backend for P2Pool or does it need to be core?
Just I am upgrading a rack server this week at work during the holiday and the old box will be reprovisioned as a uk node.
Something I've wanted to do for a while to lower my latency and we have a direct Ethernet comnection at work so probably makes sense.

windpath

legendary

Activity: 1258

Merit: 1027

Quote from: LevinSwe on December 25, 2016, 08:04:35 AM

I found my first block!BTC It was my laundry miner who found it, a BitmainS9 as I only had a week. My girlfriend hates it, but it dries the laundry really fast. Grin

Congrats!

LevinSwe

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 0

I found my first block!BTC It was my laundry miner who found it, a BitmainS9 as I only had a week. My girlfriend hates it, but it dries the laundry really fast. Grin

http://scadainfo.com/pic/0699.jpg

snailbrain

legendary

Activity: 1807

Merit: 1020

just an update for those merge mining Huntercoin.

There is a hardfork due tomorrow so don't get stuck on a bad fork.

https://github.com/chronokings/huntercoin

you may also try with https://github.com/chronokings/huntercore/tree/0.13
which is based on the latest bitcoin-core code. (you will need to addnodes for now)

Any issues please post in the main huntercoin thread.

Thanks

in2tactics

hero member

Activity: 578

Merit: 501

Quote from: KorbinDallas on December 14, 2016, 08:23:47 PM

Not so tiny of a BLOCK today Cheesy

!

Exactly!

KorbinDallas

newbie

Activity: 55

Merit: 0

Not so tiny of a BLOCK today Cheesy

!

veqtrus

member

Activity: 107

Merit: 10

P2Pool will produce blocks with witnesses upon activation on the P2Pool network, which can happen before activation on the Bitcoin network. Bitcoin Core doesn't accept such blocks before activation (even though it could strip the witnesses) so I made it so appropriate block representations will be submitted through the RPC interface.

Please note that submitting via the Bitcoin P2P network doesn't work anyway since headers-first synchronisation (P2Pool doesn't support the getheaders message).

tubexc

hero member

Activity: 496

Merit: 500