Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 781. (Read 2591916 times)
February 13, 2012, 03:47:40 PM
In my experiments, reducing intensity (the -I flag) is much more important in reducing stales than adjusting overclock settings.
February 13, 2012, 03:37:29 PM
I'm using cgminer with -I 8 -g 1 flags powertune set to 20
mining with a 6790 and a 6870
p2pool showed 59 shares 10 orphan 2 dead
I've turned off powertune for now (lose a few MH/s) and reset GPU's to default clocks, they were mildly overclocked (880 to 930)
thx for any help!
mining with a 6790 and a 6870
p2pool showed 59 shares 10 orphan 2 dead
I've turned off powertune for now (lose a few MH/s) and reset GPU's to default clocks, they were mildly overclocked (880 to 930)
thx for any help!
February 13, 2012, 03:19:33 PM
Is it normal for my P2pool client to show 24% orphans? 
No. Something is wrong. What miner? What miner settings?
My P2Pool shows "14 orphans, 4 dead", my miner settings are:
cgminer -o http://MY_IP:9332/ -u garimpeiro_miner0 -p x -g 1 --auto-fan --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 800-900 750-940 800-940 --gpu-memclock 150 -I 8 --submit-stale --gpu-reorder --api-listen --api-network
Is that right?!
Tks!
Thiago
February 13, 2012, 03:07:43 PM
forrestv; will you consider adding a command line option that limits the total number of connections? My p2pool instance currently has 47 connections, and this plus bitcoind's connections I fear might be too much for my cheap router. At least this could be the case when other people need to use the connection too for torrent downloads etc.
EDIT: Yay! We've finally reached the number of blocks our cumulative share count justifies: http://u.forre.st/p2pool/luck.png
EDIT: Yay! We've finally reached the number of blocks our cumulative share count justifies: http://u.forre.st/p2pool/luck.png
February 13, 2012, 03:00:31 PM
Is it normal for my P2pool client to show 24% orphans?
No. Something is wrong. What miner? What miner settings?
February 13, 2012, 02:36:29 PM
Yes I am.
But is it that much?
But is it that much?
Yesterday, when we had these 8 blocks in one day, I found 2 blocks in 24h... then I went to bed, and when I woke up I had found 18 shares. And I did not sleep for 48h
So yes, it can be that much.
400 Mh/s
February 13, 2012, 01:53:06 PM
Is it normal for my P2pool client to show 24% orphans?
February 13, 2012, 12:47:24 PM
Yes I am.
But is it that much?
But is it that much?
Yesterday, when we had these 8 blocks in one day, I found 2 blocks in 24h... then I went to bed, and when I woke up I had found 18 shares. And I did not sleep for 48h
So yes, it can be that much.
February 13, 2012, 10:10:37 AM
Wow - nice growth. Need to restart my p2pool node so i can atleast keep the rrd graph accurate
February 13, 2012, 09:25:13 AM
Yes I am.
But is it that much?
But is it that much?
Yesterday, when we had these 8 blocks in one day, I found 2 blocks in 24h... then I went to bed, and when I woke up I had found 18 shares. And I did not sleep for 48h
So yes, it can be that much.
February 13, 2012, 09:20:21 AM
Almost 260...
February 13, 2012, 08:59:10 AM
Over 250ghash!
February 13, 2012, 06:03:39 AM
Yes I am.
But is it that much?
But is it that much?
February 13, 2012, 05:36:25 AM
yes.
Btw: 3 blocks in 1 hour, wth
But over a period of ~28 hour only 12 shares.
According to reported time per share from p2pool I should get about 12 to 18 shares per 24 hours.
Are you aware of the term "variance" ?
February 13, 2012, 05:26:00 AM
10 blocks in last 24 hours 
February 13, 2012, 04:54:41 AM
Is that normal for ~370Mhs?
yes.
Btw: 3 blocks in 1 hour, wth
But over a period of ~28 hour only 12 shares.
According to reported time per share from p2pool I should get about 12 to 18 shares per 24 hours.
February 13, 2012, 04:07:40 AM
my logfile is fast growing
how I can cut it?
where I can see full run_p2pool.exe options list?
how I can cut it?
where I can see full run_p2pool.exe options list?
February 13, 2012, 03:19:29 AM
yes.
Btw: 3 blocks in 1 hour, wth
February 13, 2012, 02:45:42 AM
Is that normal for ~370Mhs?
February 13, 2012, 02:26:35 AM
Based on that nice plot above of "twmc" it seems that the 'optimal' solution will be p2pools will split up according to size of the miners.
That is my first thought too.
A big pool, with high share-difficulty and with the bigger miners.
A sub-pool, with its own sharechain, where small miners work. The sub-pool would request work from the big pool, just as the sub-pool would be one of the bigger miners.
That way all miners would have payouts in short timeframes, and the small miners would have fine-grained enough proof-of-their-work too.
The small miners would have one (or double) the hops, with higher latency accordingly.
There might be more centralization with this setup too.
Ente
Jump to: