[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 798.

Red Emerald

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Quote from: fred0 on February 04, 2012, 03:11:03 AM

Hopefully this diagram will help with your config.

Don't forget to open the ports on your router/firewall.

Also I modified the ports because I wanted to try litecoin p2pool, so these don't conflict if you want to do that.

[edit]You probably want to specify a bitcoin payout address -a in the command to start p2pool. I left that out.

This was posted elsewhere. Since people here are always asking how to setup p2pool, this might help them understand how everything fits together.

cheat_2_win

full member

Activity: 215

Merit: 100

Quote from: jamesg on February 05, 2012, 09:19:51 PM

Quote from: forrestv on February 05, 2012, 09:07:33 PM

Quote from: TheHarbinger on February 05, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

Is that really necessary? On Windows, you can now just unzip the executable file and double-click it, and on Linux it's just ./run_p2pool.py (clicking it in a GUI might work too). However, Uukgoblin has been working on a little GUI configurator - see here: https://github.com/goblin/p2gui/blob/master/screenshot.png

I can't speak for anyone else, but i'm pretty dumb and my spare time is dwindling more everyday. IMHO, anything that makes the transition to p2pool easier will make the concept more popular.

+1

If I don't have to spend time setting up the p2pool miner, I won't want to spend time setting up the miner. So, easier the better.

TheHarbinger

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Why is it so damn hot in here?

Quote from: forrestv on February 05, 2012, 09:07:33 PM

Quote from: TheHarbinger on February 05, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

Is that really necessary? On Windows, you can now just unzip the executable file and double-click it, and on Linux it's just ./run_p2pool.py (clicking it in a GUI might work too). However, Uukgoblin has been working on a little GUI configurator - see here: https://github.com/goblin/p2gui/blob/master/screenshot.png

Believe it or not, just "double-clicking" on it doesn't let you use any options/flags. Some of us like those things. Like the ability to set a fixed payout address. Personally I wrote script files for both my linux and windoze boxes. But there are a fair amount of people who don't know how to make a .bat file, and set it to auto-run at start-up.

While I personally use cgminer and p2pool because I think that they are the best of the choices out there, it is far easier to set up GUIminer and DeepBit. Why? No command line, no flags to set, no "why the fuck are my shares so low" etc...

Face it man, the majority of "miners" will spend 5 minutes setting up a miner and a pool, and walk away. They will never take the step to something better if it involves more work.

jamesg

vip

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

AKA: gigavps

Quote from: forrestv on February 05, 2012, 09:07:33 PM

Quote from: TheHarbinger on February 05, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

Is that really necessary? On Windows, you can now just unzip the executable file and double-click it, and on Linux it's just ./run_p2pool.py (clicking it in a GUI might work too). However, Uukgoblin has been working on a little GUI configurator - see here: https://github.com/goblin/p2gui/blob/master/screenshot.png

I can't speak for anyone else, but i'm pretty dumb and my spare time is dwindling more everyday. IMHO, anything that makes the transition to p2pool easier will make the concept more popular.

Vanderbleek

sr. member

Activity: 518

Merit: 250

I still really think running with bitcoin, or a miner would help speed adoption...or better yet make a bundled set, with preconfigured p2pool, bitcoin, and miner. Set it and forget it. I flipped through the BTC source -- you should just be able to add another tab in QT, right?

forrestv

hero member

Activity: 516

Merit: 643

Quote from: TheHarbinger on February 05, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

Is that really necessary? On Windows, you can now just unzip the executable file and double-click it, and on Linux it's just ./run_p2pool.py (clicking it in a GUI might work too). However, Uukgoblin has been working on a little GUI configurator - see here: https://github.com/goblin/p2gui/blob/master/screenshot.png

jamesg

vip

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

AKA: gigavps

Quote from: TheHarbinger on February 05, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

+1

TheHarbinger

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Why is it so damn hot in here?

Quote from: Ente on February 05, 2012, 04:18:13 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 05, 2012, 04:05:55 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 05, 2012, 03:25:23 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 02:20:56 AM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 01:30:44 AM

Well... What a hell... More 1.3GHash... Roll Eyes

More 820MHash to P2Pool... Cool

This is the future of CryptoCurrencies!!
Lets make P2Pool reach 500GHash in 1 month!! Grin

P2Pool is awesome!!
Adding more 1.3GHash to it!

More 1.3GHash!!

Lets make P2Pool reaches 200GHash/s this weekend guys!!

Came on to the future of CryptoCurrencies mining!!

Awesome, great work!

Once we are in the stickied top10 and in the pie-chart, p2pool will grow even faster.
Once that happens, variability will feel much less, making p2pool grow even more!

We are close to the critical mass, me thinks!

edit:
Oh yeah, stickied top10 ftw! :-)

Ente

What we really need is a frontend/installer for P2Pool, perhaps we need to get a bounty going.

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

2nd block found for the day and creeping up on 200 GH/s!

Quote

2012-02-05 15:53:31.791467 Pool: 191GH/s

Ente

legendary

Activity: 2126

Merit: 1001

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 05, 2012, 04:05:55 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 05, 2012, 03:25:23 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 02:20:56 AM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 01:30:44 AM

Well... What a hell... More 1.3GHash... Roll Eyes

More 820MHash to P2Pool... Cool

This is the future of CryptoCurrencies!!
Lets make P2Pool reach 500GHash in 1 month!! Grin

P2Pool is awesome!!
Adding more 1.3GHash to it!

More 1.3GHash!!

Lets make P2Pool reaches 200GHash/s this weekend guys!!

Came on to the future of CryptoCurrencies mining!!

Awesome, great work!

Once we are in the stickied top10 and in the pie-chart, p2pool will grow even faster.
Once that happens, variability will feel much less, making p2pool grow even more!

We are close to the critical mass, me thinks!

edit:
Oh yeah, stickied top10 ftw! :-)

Ente

ThiagoCMC

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1000

฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 05, 2012, 03:25:23 PM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 02:20:56 AM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 01:30:44 AM

Well... What a hell... More 1.3GHash... Roll Eyes

More 820MHash to P2Pool... Cool

This is the future of CryptoCurrencies!!
Lets make P2Pool reach 500GHash in 1 month!! Grin

P2Pool is awesome!!
Adding more 1.3GHash to it!

More 1.3GHash!!

Lets make P2Pool reaches 200GHash/s this weekend guys!!

Came on to the future of CryptoCurrencies mining!!

forrestv

hero member

Activity: 516

Merit: 643

Quote from: Frizz23 on February 05, 2012, 07:52:41 AM

What does that have to do it?

One block found is one block found. If the pool size is 1, 10 or 1000.

The statistics (and maybe more) is simply wrong.

The "Average time between blocks" datum is misnamed. It should be "Expected time between future blocks" or better yet "Expected time until next block". It does not average historical data, but estimates the future based on the current Bitcoin difficulty and P2Pool hash rate.

ThiagoCMC

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1000

฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 02:20:56 AM

Quote from: ThiagoCMC on February 04, 2012, 01:30:44 AM

Well... What a hell... More 1.3GHash... Roll Eyes

More 820MHash to P2Pool... Cool

This is the future of CryptoCurrencies!!
Lets make P2Pool reach 500GHash in 1 month!! Grin

P2Pool is awesome!!
Adding more 1.3GHash to it!

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: Frizz23 on February 05, 2012, 02:31:56 PM

btw ... I didn't bring in my definition of average - I only quoted the output of p2pool ("Average time between blocks: 0.42 days"). And that's just not correct.

That is a very rough average based on the current difficulty level combined with the estimated hashrate. Since the difficulty and estimated hashrate change every 10 seconds, you can't accurately compare the quoted average over a period of minutes, let alone weeks.

Hashing blocks has huge variance. While the average time for p2pool to find a block might be 10 hours, there's about a 10% change it'll end up being 30 hours.

ancow

full member

Activity: 373

Merit: 100

Quote from: Frizz23 on February 05, 2012, 02:31:56 PM

- statistics for 2012 so far (Jan 1st ... now): 36 days / 45 blocks = 0.8 days per block (and not 0.42).
- statistics for the last couple of days would be even worse.

If you're gonna do that, you'll also need to average the "averages" p2pool printed since Jan 1st. Otherwise you're comparing apples and oranges...

The "average" p2pool prints is just the pool hashrate displayed another way; it's not really an average, it's an expected average if the hashrate stayed at whatever it is when it's being printed.
All you've shown so far is that the pool hashrate is likely increasing, which doesn't really come as a big surprise...

DiabloD3

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 1000

DiabloMiner author

Quote from: Frizz23 on February 05, 2012, 02:31:56 PM

Quote from: m3ta on February 05, 2012, 01:42:48 PM

Indeed, your notion of "average" reeks more than cow dung.

No need to get personal.

btw ... I didn't bring in my definition of average - I only quoted the output of p2pool ("Average time between blocks: 0.42 days"). And that's just not correct.

- statistics for 2012 so far (Jan 1st ... now): 36 days / 45 blocks = 0.8 days per block (and not 0.42).
- statistics for the last couple of days would be even worse.

I suspect the average is since the dawn of p2pool.

Frizz23

hero member

Activity: 1162

Merit: 500

Quote from: m3ta on February 05, 2012, 01:42:48 PM

Indeed, your notion of "average" reeks more than cow dung.

No need to get personal.

btw ... I didn't bring in my definition of average - I only quoted the output of p2pool ("Average time between blocks: 0.42 days"). And that's just not correct.

- statistics for 2012 so far (Jan 1st ... now): 36 days / 45 blocks = 0.8 days per block (and not 0.42).
- statistics for the last couple of days would be even worse.

m3ta

sr. member

Activity: 435

Merit: 250