[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 8.

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

FYI, the dev fee does not go to me. It goes to forrestv.

Our LTC hashrate will probably be staying on p2pool as long as merged mining and multipool mining has a small or zero advantage over straight LTC mining.

Kiefff

newbie

Activity: 32

Merit: 0

Awesome work Jtoomim. I'm currently running your fork and enabled the 1% dev fee. Will the hash you put on the pool be staying with us?As in not rentals?

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

I'm moving the rest of our L3+s onto p2pool. P2pool's LTC hashrate should now be around 500 GH/s, enough for 2-3 blocks per day on average.

Tornado_of_Coins

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

I have an S9 and tried to connect to several JT pools and it's not showing work at all, does it take a while to show connection?

This is the current one I tried : ml.toom.im:9332

EDIT: Ok, its connected took about 3-5minutes

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

I pushed two changes to 1mb_segwit that change how pseudoshare difficulty is calculated for miners.

First, I fixed a bug for Litecoin that was limiting difficulty to about 15k. This resulted in excessive CPU and bandwidth usage on p2pool nodes that have more than about 10 GH/s. I fixed that bug, which means that Litecoin difficulties will be more reasonable (e.g. 226k on my node with 100 GH/s.

Second, I increased the target pseudoshare rate on all networks to 10 per second (from 1 per second, except for Litecoin's bug).

This should result in smoother hashrate graphs for all nets except Litecoin, at the expense of slightly higher CPU and bandwidth usage. For Litecoin, expect rougher hashrate graphs but substantially lower CPU and bandwidth usage.

If you're running my code, a git pull should grab the changes. Unless you're running a large Litecoin node, these changes are not likely to make a big difference for you, so feel free to skip this update.

crypto_curious

full member

Activity: 924

Merit: 175

Quote from: uspeh6325 on January 21, 2018, 09:18:41 AM

how are payouts from the p2pool? in what period of time payments?

Everytime there is a block found by p2pool, you get payment. Providing that you have shares found and accounted for in p2pool sharechain.

uspeh6325

newbie

Activity: 2

Merit: 0

how are payouts from the p2pool? in what period of time payments?

crypto_curious

full member

Activity: 924

Merit: 175

Quote from: uspeh6325 on January 20, 2018, 10:57:39 AM

Hi. Tell me, please. I set my antminer s9 on p2pool (stratum+tcp://p2pool.org:9332). the connection to the pool was good. in the Miner Dashboard I could see their statistics. But after 12 hours of work the pool in antminer died. and when in the opening of the Miner Dashboard appeared an error "Invalid Address! The bitcoin address you submitted (1DQrUQ2S9pbA58KxjtGEZ54RfXC49saZ6m) is not valid." . I tried again to reconfigure antminer s9, but the status of the pool "dead". change of address of the wallet did not help. why? what to do?

Don't mine on that server. Find yourself a jtoomim p2pool fork node and mine there.

uspeh6325

newbie

Activity: 2

Merit: 0

Hi. Tell me, please. I set my antminer s9 on p2pool (stratum+tcp://p2pool.org:9332). the connection to the pool was good. in the Miner Dashboard I could see their statistics. But after 12 hours of work the pool in antminer died. and when in the opening of the Miner Dashboard appeared an error "Invalid Address! The bitcoin address you submitted (1DQrUQ2S9pbA58KxjtGEZ54RfXC49saZ6m) is not valid." . I tried again to reconfigure antminer s9, but the status of the pool "dead". change of address of the wallet did not help. why? what to do?

smoothrunnings

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Are there any good BTC front-ends for P2Pool?

Thanks

smoothrunnings

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Is there a stat page on your p2pool addition?

How to I access it?

Thanks,

- Update - Found it.

smoothrunnings

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Using a SHA ASIC miner with my pool. I take it I just have to put the sername:9332 and my bitcoin wallet id in for the user name right?

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

"pypy run_p2pool.py" is sufficient, but you may want to consider adding "--fee 0 --address (your address here) --give-author 0" or some variant thereof.

Quote from: kr1z1s on January 19, 2018, 02:40:26 PM

Why displays the same thing several times? This is LTC, you source

You probably have several different miners on your node. The section of code that prints that line gets run once per share per user. It's supposed to squelch the output from users after the first, but for some reason it isn't. I'm not sure why it's printing that line multiple times, but I wouldn't worry about it too much. If you want me to take a look at your node to make sure it's running well, let me know your IP.

Edit: Just checked the source, and it doesn't squelch at all. Oops. I should probably fix that. Don't worry about it though, it's just harmless debugging output. If it bothers you, you can replace line 215 of p2pool/data.py with "if 0:" to get rid of the text.

smoothrunnings

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Do I need to anything to the "pypy run_p2pool.py" line to start the server in BTC?

Hate to install the GUI for ubuntu so I can see where I was at for the block on bitcoin-qt as for some reason I couldn't get an update from bitcoind that I might make a shortcut to run p2pool.

Thanks,

kr1z1s

member

Activity: 199

Merit: 11

Quote from: jtoomim on January 19, 2018, 01:09:36 PM

Quote from: sawa on January 19, 2018, 07:16:28 AM

Can I still use your version of LTC p2pool? Which branch to download?

Yes, go ahead. It's just the same 1mb_segwit branch, but with a few new commits. The new commits shouldn't adversely effect BTC or BCH, but I haven't tested them there yet.

I mined this LTC block with my code last night: http://explorer.litecoin.net/block/df565f1dbfdd5bfd2dd14b3065eb77b12bd1c9a0a222aec7e3cc9fde356726c2. I'd say it's ready for open beta.

If we get too many shares using my code, it will hard fork. We should try to delay that until my code is in p2pool/p2pool master. The threshold for that should be 95%. It might be a good idea to avoid getting over 50% until the code is in master so that people don't get confused when a git pull doesn't fix the warnings about obsolete software.

Why displays the same thing several times? This is LTC, you source

Code:

2018-01-19 21:32:26.370926 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.371066 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.389393 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.389545 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.406837 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.406988 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.424838 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.424983 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.442323 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.442502 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.460687 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.460876 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.478698 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.478868 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.499163 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.499333 Total block stripped size=93567 B, full size=95097 B, weight: 375754 WU
2018-01-19 21:32:26.517609 Generating a share with 90674 bytes, 358106 WU (new: 51019 B, 202765 WU) in 169 tx (35 new), plus est gentx of 4343 bytes/17408 WU

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

Quote from: sawa on January 19, 2018, 07:16:28 AM

Can I still use your version of LTC p2pool? Which branch to download?

Yes, go ahead. It's just the same 1mb_segwit branch, but with a few new commits. The new commits shouldn't adversely effect BTC or BCH, but I haven't tested them there yet.

I mined this LTC block with my code last night: http://explorer.litecoin.net/block/df565f1dbfdd5bfd2dd14b3065eb77b12bd1c9a0a222aec7e3cc9fde356726c2. I'd say it's ready for open beta.

If we get too many shares using my code, it will hard fork. We should try to delay that until my code is in p2pool/p2pool master. The threshold for that should be 95%. It might be a good idea to avoid getting over 50% until the code is in master so that people don't get confused when a git pull doesn't fix the warnings about obsolete software. Edit: I switched my node to vote for v17 for now. That should prevent premature forking on LTC.

sawa

legendary

Activity: 1308

Merit: 1011

Quote from: jtoomim on January 18, 2018, 08:52:01 PM

I have a node running Litecoin using the 1mb_segwit code plus a few new commits:

http://woff.toom.im:9327

I'm going to dump some more hashrate on it in a sec and see if it can mine blocks.

Edit: ran into bug 241 (https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/241), testing the fix...

Edit2: ran into another bug. Shares are being rejected by other nodes on the ltc network and connections killed.

Edit3: Looks like the above bug was an incompatibility of this timestamp non-clipping commit with mainnet nodes. I added a change that clips timestamps if share_version < 32, and that seems to have resolved that issue so far. Hashing is resuming with ~50 GH/s.

Edit4: Upped hashrate to 105 GH/s. Also moved ~700 TH/s to Bitcoin Cash via http://woff.toom.im:9348.

Can I still use your version of LTC p2pool?
Which branch to download?

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

I have a node running Litecoin using the 1mb_segwit code plus a few new commits:

http://woff.toom.im:9327

I'm going to dump some more hashrate on it in a sec and see if it can mine blocks.

Edit: ran into bug 241 (https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/241), testing the fix...

Edit2: ran into another bug. Shares are being rejected by other nodes on the ltc network and connections killed.

Edit3: Looks like the above bug was an incompatibility of this timestamp non-clipping commit with mainnet nodes. I added a change that clips timestamps if share_version < 32, and that seems to have resolved that issue so far. Hashing is resuming with ~50 GH/s.

Edit4: Upped hashrate to 105 GH/s. Also moved ~700 TH/s to Bitcoin Cash via http://woff.toom.im:9348.

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

If there are any decent Python coders who are interested in contributing to p2pool, I'm willing to pay for good PRs.

jtoomim

hero member

Activity: 818

Merit: 1006

Cython and pypy are essentially incompatible with each other. To use Cython, we would have to Cythonize enough code that the Cython+CPython combo was faster than pypy. That will require Cythonizing a ton of code.

It might also be possible to rewrite the pack.py code as a C module using CFFI, which would be compatible with both pypy and CPython, but that would complicate the build and installation process for p2pool.

Cythonization would probably take longer than just removing transactions from share objects and eliminating the transaction-related code from the p2p layer. Multithreading using Cython would be even harder than plain Cythonization, and would not provide as much of a benefit.

Multithreading and Cythonization aren't needed if we reduce the amount of work done by p2pool by 90%.

It also appears that there is a lot of duplicate work that's being performed by p2pool during the creation of new work for miners that can be eliminated by caching intermediate results.

The only transaction handling code we really need is handling the transactions handed to us by getblocktemplate, calculating the merkle root hash and merkle path to the coinbase transaction, and then reassembling the full block when a block is found and handing that block back to bitcoind. It used to be nice to include the transactions in compressed form in the shares we send to peers to allow them to publish the blocks simultaneously on their nodes as well, but now that we have FIBRE, Compact Blocks, and XThin, p2pool is much slower at this task than bitcoind, so that no longer makes sense for p2pool to do.

Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 8. (Read 2591626 times)