No, when you using "outside" node you not have to run bitcoin nor p2pool, only miner.
How much power you have? BTC share diff is about 22`500 now.
Topic: A guide for mining efficiently on P2Pool, includes FUD repellent and FAQ - page 7. (Read 174901 times)
August 13, 2013, 07:15:43 PM
August 13, 2013, 12:59:29 PM
when i first tried p2pool all i did was point my miner at p2pool.org. After a while my graph was showing hashrate + payout.
now if i try it my graph shows hashrate but never get payout. i never knew about setting up p2pool before hand i just pointed miner at it.
is it even possible to use p2pool that way? or do you HAVE to run bit coin/p2pool aswell?
now if i try it my graph shows hashrate but never get payout. i never knew about setting up p2pool before hand i just pointed miner at it.
is it even possible to use p2pool that way? or do you HAVE to run bit coin/p2pool aswell?
August 04, 2013, 12:01:22 PM
The last questions should probably be asked in the main p2pool thread
This guide is for information related to mining efficiently on p2pool, it shouldn't duplicate information on how to use p2pool or stratum-proxy (the guide is already too long to my taste). That said, I've never used stratum-proxy, if someone find out there are specific configuration options to use to make it efficient with p2pool and some hardware, I'd gladly add them to the guide.
This guide is for information related to mining efficiently on p2pool, it shouldn't duplicate information on how to use p2pool or stratum-proxy (the guide is already too long to my taste). That said, I've never used stratum-proxy, if someone find out there are specific configuration options to use to make it efficient with p2pool and some hardware, I'd gladly add them to the guide.
August 04, 2013, 07:27:31 AM
so on the wiki it states that setting the username with an appended '+1" will make P2Pool always give your miners work with a difficulty of 1...
will this have any negative effect?
will this have any negative effect?
August 04, 2013, 06:05:39 AM
ive tried using the stratum proxy but for some reason when i have it connected to p2pool the AM Blade just doesnt connect and start hashing... it works on btcguild... but not p2pool for some reason...
August 04, 2013, 05:46:27 AM
Notice that says scrypt with cgminer which does not apply to bitcoin. Eruptors don't have any way to set difficulty, they have extremely simple mining software built in that only does diff 1. You could probably use the stratum proxy by slush between the blades and your p2pool software to get rid of the message, but not sure if that really gains you anything but adds another layer ...
And this is a problem which has been solved long ago (p2pool is using the same protocol than other pools for quite some time).
I changed the FAQ entry and suggested using stratum-proxy when it becomes a problem (might help by distributing the load across CPU cores or handling share submissions more efficiently than p2pool).
August 04, 2013, 02:37:23 AM
Known bugs/issues
Q: Why do I get lots of "Worker
A: If you use cgminer, scrypt and stratum, this is because cgminer and p2pool disagree on how to represent difficulty targets on stratum. p2pool seems to use a sane definition of target difficulty, unfortunately most other pools didn't establishing a de-facto standard that cgminer follows. Current solution: use the "--fix-protocol" parameter of cgminer. It will force it to use getwork (instead of stratum) where both agree on how to communicate difficulty targets.
one of my miners is an ASICMiner Eruptor Blade, which i believe uses getwork, but i am still seeing the hash > target msgs on the cli fly by...
any idea as to why it would still be doing this considering its using getwork? and is there anything that can be done to fix?
August 03, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
Known bugs/issues
Q: Why do I get lots of "Worker
A: If you use cgminer, scrypt and stratum, this is because cgminer and p2pool disagree on how to represent difficulty targets on stratum. p2pool seems to use a sane definition of target difficulty, unfortunately most other pools didn't establishing a de-facto standard that cgminer follows. Current solution: use the "--fix-protocol" parameter of cgminer. It will force it to use getwork (instead of stratum) where both agree on how to communicate difficulty targets.
one of my miners is an ASICMiner Eruptor Blade, which i believe uses getwork, but i am still seeing the hash > target msgs on the cli fly by...
any idea as to why it would still be doing this considering its using getwork? and is there anything that can be done to fix?
Does the Eruptor Blade support variable difficulty? If not then these messages are normal. You might want to ask ASICMINER about how their miner software reacts with difficulties different than 1.
August 02, 2013, 11:41:28 PM
Known bugs/issues
Q: Why do I get lots of "Worker
A: If you use cgminer, scrypt and stratum, this is because cgminer and p2pool disagree on how to represent difficulty targets on stratum. p2pool seems to use a sane definition of target difficulty, unfortunately most other pools didn't establishing a de-facto standard that cgminer follows. Current solution: use the "--fix-protocol" parameter of cgminer. It will force it to use getwork (instead of stratum) where both agree on how to communicate difficulty targets.
one of my miners is an ASICMiner Eruptor Blade, which i believe uses getwork, but i am still seeing the hash > target msgs on the cli fly by...
any idea as to why it would still be doing this considering its using getwork? and is there anything that can be done to fix?
July 27, 2013, 04:01:08 PM
July 15, 2013, 11:55:47 PM
Nice guide!
Just read it, glad to see it's been updated for the new fork (30 second share clock, instead of 10 second).
I don't think I have a problem with latency. Had a big problem with total bandwidth consumption, though. My cable ISP doesn't like large users of bandwidth. So, I'm glad I keep a backup DSL line. Ports 8333 and 9333 now go there. Works great, my DSL is ideal for continuous P2P background traffic like this: it has a slow top speed, because it's DSL, but it has good response time, and it's unmetered.
Thanks for the tip about tuning the bitcoin.conf settings, so that bitcoind is more generous about the transactions it accepts. It was worth a Bitcoin restart, so I did that. Also gave me the chance to test my restart scripts. I rather like how P2Pool does true mining (your node gets to dictate the contents of the block if you win).
Here's my stats (don't laugh):
Josh
Just read it, glad to see it's been updated for the new fork (30 second share clock, instead of 10 second).
I don't think I have a problem with latency. Had a big problem with total bandwidth consumption, though. My cable ISP doesn't like large users of bandwidth. So, I'm glad I keep a backup DSL line. Ports 8333 and 9333 now go there. Works great, my DSL is ideal for continuous P2P background traffic like this: it has a slow top speed, because it's DSL, but it has good response time, and it's unmetered.
Thanks for the tip about tuning the bitcoin.conf settings, so that bitcoind is more generous about the transactions it accepts. It was worth a Bitcoin restart, so I did that. Also gave me the chance to test my restart scripts. I rather like how P2Pool does true mining (your node gets to dictate the contents of the block if you win).
Here's my stats (don't laugh):
Code:
Pool rate: 1.43TH/s (13% DOA+orphan) Share difficulty: 7300
Node uptime: 5.309 days Peers: 11 out, 5 in
Local rate: 308MH/s (9.3% DOA) Expected time to share: 28.3 hours
Shares: 14 total (3 orphaned, 0 dead) Efficiency: 89.92%
Josh
July 15, 2013, 02:16:41 PM
Just updated the guide to account for the new BTC 30 second interval, the current hashrate and the upcoming Avalon fix(es).
TL;DR;:
TL;DR;:
- more hardware should work efficiently (Avalon is still not working correctly but should be shortly),
- most setup should be good enough on P2Pool now without tuning,
- tuning should still squeeze some extra income.
July 02, 2013, 05:55:37 PM
Just updated the guide as there was a second detailed report in the main P2Pool thread here. Please include cgminer's API output when reporting results with BFL Asics, it might help pinpoint which firmwares and/or configurations work best with P2Pool.
July 02, 2013, 05:51:55 PM
hi I have a question p2pool is sending my miner diff 1 shares and I want it to send the p2pool diff
now somewhere I read you could put /1000 next to the miners name so I tried user/1000 and its still getting diff 1 shares from p2pool
now somewhere I read you could put /1000 next to the miners name so I tried user/1000 and its still getting diff 1 shares from p2pool
This is a question better asked in the main P2Pool thread (see first post for a link).
June 30, 2013, 04:15:38 PM
hi I have a question p2pool is sending my miner diff 1 shares and I want it to send the p2pool diff
now somewhere I read you could put /1000 next to the miners name so I tried user/1000 and its still getting diff 1 shares from p2pool
now somewhere I read you could put /1000 next to the miners name so I tried user/1000 and its still getting diff 1 shares from p2pool
June 30, 2013, 12:13:56 PM
Thanks for clarifying! There was some confusion in this thread where someone said DOA's are not wasted work and can still payout.
DOAs aren't wasted work and can still generate a valid block which would pay everyone.
However DOAs aren't used to compute the share of a miner in the payouts, only shared accepted in the sharechain. This is explained in more details in the original post of this thread.
June 30, 2013, 08:39:15 AM
I have a question about DOA's and efficiency.
With p2pool scrypt-mining (ltc) I get a local rate of 2MH/s with 20% DOA. This is with intensity in cgminer set at 20.
If I lower intensity to 17, the local rate drops to 1.8MH/s with DOA 3%.
In both cases, efficiency is 100%+
Which one is better, 2MH/s with 20% DOA, or 1.8MH/s with 3% DOA?
With p2pool scrypt-mining (ltc) I get a local rate of 2MH/s with 20% DOA. This is with intensity in cgminer set at 20.
If I lower intensity to 17, the local rate drops to 1.8MH/s with DOA 3%.
In both cases, efficiency is 100%+
Which one is better, 2MH/s with 20% DOA, or 1.8MH/s with 3% DOA?
DOA shares do payout and don't necessarily negatively affect payout (as long as you have < average DOA) but in the case of a difference of 3% and 20% - that should affect payout.
In both cases efficiency is > 100%, but were they the same?
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the real calculation be:
2MH/s x efficiency = effective rate
1.8MH/s x efficiency = effective rate
Not
MH/s - doa% = effective rate
June 30, 2013, 04:17:38 AM
Thanks for clarifying! There was some confusion in this thread where someone said DOA's are not wasted work and can still payout.
June 30, 2013, 03:55:30 AM
Which one is better, 2MH/s with 20% DOA, or 1.8MH/s with 3% DOA?
The math is pretty simple:
2MH/s - 20% = 1.6MH/s effective
1.8MH/s - 3% = 1.747MH/s effective
The OP on this particular subject should do the math for intensity 18 and 19 too. I'll guesstimate that 19 should be the right spot.
Edit: BTW, as soon as the P2Pool network you are on switch to a 30s block interval (BTC and LTC will) all these computations will have to be done again.
June 29, 2013, 11:22:50 PM
Which one is better, 2MH/s with 20% DOA, or 1.8MH/s with 3% DOA?
The math is pretty simple:
2MH/s - 20% = 1.6MH/s effective
1.8MH/s - 3% = 1.747MH/s effective
Jump to: