This pool is now closed, due to lack of demand/use.
-MarkM-
Topic: [CLOSED] Massively Merged Mining (Read 3860 times)
It took something like 12 hours to get machine upgraded to Fedora 17 from Fedora 16.
Whenever using pools you should always have "failover": backup pools your miner(s) switch too during downtimes of main pool(s).
Sorry about that but now I have three machines here upgraded to Fedora 17 and can start to look into splitting stuff up across multiple machines so not everything will have to go down at once when the current single main server machine goes down for maintenance upgrades etc.
Actually the machine itself was not down 12 hours, but the latest bitcoin from github switched over to a new type of database for its blockchain and for some reason or lack of reason decided to download the whole blockchain from peers instead of grabbing it from the old-stype-database copy that was already present.
Thus the pool as unusable for many more hours than the rest of the stuff on that server.
I do not know why bitcoin does not convert over the old blockchain when it upgrades like that but oh well it has a new format blockchain now so should be okay now despite constantly spewing warnings about being an experimental version. (It is that new, right from top of the github repo.)
All of the coin daemons had to be recompiled too before they would work with all the new libraries that came with the new version of the operating-system.
-MarkM-
Whenever using pools you should always have "failover": backup pools your miner(s) switch too during downtimes of main pool(s).
Sorry about that but now I have three machines here upgraded to Fedora 17 and can start to look into splitting stuff up across multiple machines so not everything will have to go down at once when the current single main server machine goes down for maintenance upgrades etc.
Actually the machine itself was not down 12 hours, but the latest bitcoin from github switched over to a new type of database for its blockchain and for some reason or lack of reason decided to download the whole blockchain from peers instead of grabbing it from the old-stype-database copy that was already present.
Thus the pool as unusable for many more hours than the rest of the stuff on that server.
I do not know why bitcoin does not convert over the old blockchain when it upgrades like that but oh well it has a new format blockchain now so should be okay now despite constantly spewing warnings about being an experimental version. (It is that new, right from top of the github repo.)
All of the coin daemons had to be recompiled too before they would work with all the new libraries that came with the new version of the operating-system.
-MarkM-
Trying it out, but bfgminer is waiting most of the time. Tried it with and without lp.
I had only three miners in October, each joined the pool for only a very very brief time, one of them not getting any actually valid mining done just errors.
It isn't really worth my while to run through all these calculations so I guess I probably should hope no one comes along at all during November as this is pretty silly to bother spending time on.
But here are the figures anyway:
I do the figures by hand, and obviously there is no point bothering to develop software to to do it since there is no demand for the service.
No point developing software for doing the books of a service that no-one actually wants.
Siince we do it using p2pool anyway maybe that actually makes sense, since really p2pool is intended as a way to avoid centralisation thus basically to avoid the need for pools. Anyone interested in massively merged mining should just do it themselves I guess.
Notice I accounted the coiledcoins as being of zero value. There are no exchanges for them and most folks consider them dead and if not well hey I guess the pool can use them as its cut of the wealth.
-MarkM-
It isn't really worth my while to run through all these calculations so I guess I probably should hope no one comes along at all during November as this is pretty silly to bother spending time on.
But here are the figures anyway:
Code:
=================================================================================
OCTOBER
=================================================================================
Address TeraHashes DeVCoin
---------------------------------- ---------- ---------------
1HHPLDMm2YCQUw23qJ9VkP1UbxFeVPtKqN 0.0129 3.41959219 (< 50)
1JdWuzGBFmLdffYbLUoC7RyBaWEDpjaTAB 0.0172 4.56133103 (< 50)
markm 1060 281208.47693989 (sent)
---------
Total 1060.030
---------
Coiledcoin 600 - 470 = 130 * 0.00000000 = 0
Devcoin 55004 - 20000 = 35000 * 1.00000000 = 35000
Groupcoin 244050 - 151200 = 92850 * 0.72987012 = 67768.44064200
I0coin 3696 - 2736 = 960 * 0.37662337 = 361.55843520
Ixcoin 1440 - 768 = 672 * 105.37766233 = 70813.78908576
Namecoin 50 - 0 = 50 * 2145.45350649 = 107272.67532450
---------------
Total in DeVCoin 281216.46348746
---------------
Thus DeVCoins = (TeraHashes / 1060.0301) * 281216.46348746
=================================================================================
I do the figures by hand, and obviously there is no point bothering to develop software to to do it since there is no demand for the service.
No point developing software for doing the books of a service that no-one actually wants.
Siince we do it using p2pool anyway maybe that actually makes sense, since really p2pool is intended as a way to avoid centralisation thus basically to avoid the need for pools. Anyone interested in massively merged mining should just do it themselves I guess.
Notice I accounted the coiledcoins as being of zero value. There are no exchanges for them and most folks consider them dead and if not well hey I guess the pool can use them as its cut of the wealth.
-MarkM-
Everyone stopped mining at the end of August, September I have been mining alone.
I guess Massively Merged Mining is not a popular concept.
Once ASICs start coming out dedicated hardware accumulation specifically for the purpsoe of Massively Merged Mining will begin, but it looks like reaching a point where all the blockchains waiting in the wings will be able to come back out into the open could take a while.
Not being out in the open does not seem to have hurt them though, they seem to be doing quite well for themselves so maybe being a P2P blockchain is over-rated; few of the "altcoins" seem to be doing well in fact so maybe "going private" was actually very advantageous.
-MarkM-
I guess Massively Merged Mining is not a popular concept.
Once ASICs start coming out dedicated hardware accumulation specifically for the purpsoe of Massively Merged Mining will begin, but it looks like reaching a point where all the blockchains waiting in the wings will be able to come back out into the open could take a while.
Not being out in the open does not seem to have hurt them though, they seem to be doing quite well for themselves so maybe being a P2P blockchain is over-rated; few of the "altcoins" seem to be doing well in fact so maybe "going private" was actually very advantageous.
-MarkM-
Namecoins are difficult enough that we have not found any blocks yet. Groupcoin is easy enough that we find lots of blocks.
-MarkM-
-MarkM-
Coiledcoin 0
Devcoin 5000 = 5000.00000000
Groupcoin 35550 * 6.65191256 = 236475.49150800
I0coin 1200 * 6.57103825 = 7885.24590000
Ixcoin 384 * 11.91912568 = 4576.94426112
Namecoin 0
-----------------
Total in DeVCoin 253937.68166912
-----------------
Devcoin 5000 = 5000.00000000
Groupcoin 35550 * 6.65191256 = 236475.49150800
I0coin 1200 * 6.57103825 = 7885.24590000
Ixcoin 384 * 11.91912568 = 4576.94426112
Namecoin 0
-----------------
Total in DeVCoin 253937.68166912
-----------------
Are namecoins being merged mined? Does groupcoin have a 35,550 generation rate and/or a value 6.6 times as high as devcoin?
Well I don't have any code for doing this yet so this is somewhat improvised, done manually.
I have based it on the TeraHashes (of "area") shown on the "month" scale of p2pool's graphs page.
I figure if I only do it once a month hopefully it will not be too much of a burden and I can look into automating it somehow in the meantime.
Transaction fees in DeVCoin are pretty large, I have to check exactly I think they are a thousand times as large as in bitcoin but I wasn't sure so for now figured on not paying out totals less than 50 coins (in case fee is 50 whole coins; I think it is certainly 50 somethings.)
This looks like pretty reasonable set of calculations and if others agree then I will likely do same again at end of the month.
Any comments/suggestions?
-MarkM-
I have based it on the TeraHashes (of "area") shown on the "month" scale of p2pool's graphs page.
I figure if I only do it once a month hopefully it will not be too much of a burden and I can look into automating it somehow in the meantime.
Transaction fees in DeVCoin are pretty large, I have to check exactly I think they are a thousand times as large as in bitcoin but I wasn't sure so for now figured on not paying out totals less than 50 coins (in case fee is 50 whole coins; I think it is certainly 50 somethings.)
Code:
Address TeraHashes DeVCoin
---------------------------------- ---------- -------
12FPQHMqG6NXBK8K8Tn435svYQJLyt5c7y 0.0129 1.84104819 (< 50)
13dA3V8DHJMqTcwEFZvzSVzZeieEoaJEdn 0.0301 4.29916495 (< 50)
17CDYJvGEF4W2gdP2TQANySc2hAcuNtdmQ 244 34853.15757736 (sent)
1CfKYCAnu52amEtfXtrhigZH7mwKPfpr7C 31 4428.06371787 (sent)
1DjFMfzBWfFBkbsB2K51DP6tLmWEdKnqKT 0.133 18.99707796 (< 50)
1EFhXfX9uXsbXBF3LC69GiVfS3SHCsyMR1 4.34 619.92790475 (sent)
1HwVHpYBjernATw2ewiApEqdE97vCSs2qa 3.65 521.36707236 (sent)
1MdvCt2qHUj7mnGcZDgCfciCUnQ6YtDUhr 0.601 85.84617266 (sent)
1Sexyf79rohiAeFRHKj2LHwpLEzfK5CBf 453 64706.88657434 (sent)
markm 1040 148554.44271582 (that's me)
---------
Total 1777.7670
---------
Coiledcoin 0
Devcoin 5000 = 5000.00000000
Groupcoin 35550 * 6.65191256 = 236475.49150800
I0coin 1200 * 6.57103825 = 7885.24590000
Ixcoin 384 * 11.91912568 = 4576.94426112
Namecoin 0
-----------------
Total in DeVCoin 253937.68166912
-----------------
Thus DeVCoins = (TeraHashes / 1777.7670) * 253937.68166912
sendtoaddress 17CDYJvGEF4W2gdP2TQANySc2hAcuNtdmQ 34853.15757736
efee3e8025ce2712086538325a52d31f734758d0c6096af14113a451923581fb
sendtoaddress 1CfKYCAnu52amEtfXtrhigZH7mwKPfpr7C 4428.06371787
1d8449fb92347be85c265f1c9d393d413872947620c0149e3b0d58afdbf6f046
sendtoaddress 1EFhXfX9uXsbXBF3LC69GiVfS3SHCsyMR1 619.92790475
2b607a81204b7ec9a641cf08e634f26f038850a1cff2a353fe186f419f4136fc
sendtoaddress 1HwVHpYBjernATw2ewiApEqdE97vCSs2qa 521.36707236
efdf8799c1e51173ce3062c9e917b47a5104f09656c9611bd17489859b8c046a
sendtoaddress 1MdvCt2qHUj7mnGcZDgCfciCUnQ6YtDUhr 85.84617266
d56eb5e0927031e9be9f1c34313b0637fc6c9ea363f28a7b3ef958d7a886c8a6
sendtoaddress 1Sexyf79rohiAeFRHKj2LHwpLEzfK5CBf 64706.88657434
55f396b07d7c67b014bc11df47029a6464cdbb9eaf5290e0e641e734b6e13f49
This looks like pretty reasonable set of calculations and if others agree then I will likely do same again at end of the month.
Any comments/suggestions?
-MarkM-
Well it is based on bitcoin code that compiled on windows so there is no reason it should fail to compile on windows. Maybe someone who is used to windows can help you with whatever specific compiler or linker errors you are getting...
Then too once you do get it compiled, I believe there is still a bounty avalable for anyone who provides windows binaries...
-MarkM-
Then too once you do get it compiled, I believe there is still a bounty avalable for anyone who provides windows binaries...
-MarkM-
What operating system are you trying to compile a devcoin client on?
-MarkM-
-MarkM-
Noobish windows.
What operating system are you trying to compile a devcoin client on?
-MarkM-
-MarkM-
The way that I exported a private key from a bitcoin wallet and imported it into a devcoin wallet was with the python script pywallet.py
I guess the scrypt won't help due to lack of working devcoin client.
I had pulled from git just yesterday or the day before, bt since you asked, I did a git pull again:
So no, I evidently was missing the last couple of days of updates to the github repo.
Thus I have halted p2pool and restartedi t so make sure it actually uses the latest changes.
The way that I exported a private key from a bitcoin wallet and imported it into a devcoin wallet was with the python script pywallet.py
-MarkM-
EDIT: I wonder what that new tag thing is about in the git output. I wonder if it is hinting I might not really be getting the latest code just by pulling. NOrmally pull works but I don't know what tags are about; the other day I had weird problems with luke-jr's version of PPCoin due to him using a branch, which I am guessing is not the same as a tag...
Code:
git pull
remote: Counting objects: 23, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (18/18), done.
remote: Total 18 (delta 13), reused 5 (delta 0)
Unpacking objects: 100% (18/18), done.
From https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool
a8fb7d1..2adf77e master -> origin/master
* [new tag] 4.0 -> 4.0
Updating a8fb7d1..2adf77e
Fast-forward
p2pool/data.py | 2 +-
p2pool/main.py | 12 +++++++-----
p2pool/work.py | 2 +-
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
So no, I evidently was missing the last couple of days of updates to the github repo.
Thus I have halted p2pool and restartedi t so make sure it actually uses the latest changes.
The way that I exported a private key from a bitcoin wallet and imported it into a devcoin wallet was with the python script pywallet.py
-MarkM-
EDIT: I wonder what that new tag thing is about in the git output. I wonder if it is hinting I might not really be getting the latest code just by pulling. NOrmally pull works but I don't know what tags are about; the other day I had weird problems with luke-jr's version of PPCoin due to him using a branch, which I am guessing is not the same as a tag...
Are you running the latest p2pool release? http://screenshooter.net/9331790/mlxtbtf
And is there any chance of tutorial how to extract devcoins from btc address on windows or on-line wallet like https://blockchain.info?
And is there any chance of tutorial how to extract devcoins from btc address on windows or on-line wallet like https://blockchain.info?
Hmm probably people on p2pool's own thread would be more likely to know the answer to that. Interesting question, presumably the author had some particular reason for doing it one way or another way, its been worked on a long time with lots of fixes. I guess that doesn't mean its about as good as it can get yet though I suppose.
Yeah I assume they don't treat alt stales as the whole result being stale. I seem to recall that high stales on p2pool is normal but doesn't mean the same thing as high stales on standard pools so it's not a big issue. Hmm, p2pool's console output is saying it has 8.4% stale rate and the p2pool network as a whole has 7% stale rate, and our percent has slowly been creeping down toward to overall network's rate though when running so many merged chains it is to be expected that there will be some impact on the primary chain from all the extra processing the system is doing to handle all the additional chains.
p2pool has 10 second longpoll times. High stales are likely to be expected. Does it consider a result a stale if it's stale on the altchain but not the primary chain?Hmm probably people on p2pool's own thread would be more likely to know the answer to that. Interesting question, presumably the author had some particular reason for doing it one way or another way, its been worked on a long time with lots of fixes. I guess that doesn't mean its about as good as it can get yet though I suppose.
-MarkM-
Hmm, p2pool's console output is saying it has 8.4% stale rate and the p2pool network as a whole has 7% stale rate, and our percent has slowly been creeping down toward to overall network's rate though when running so many merged chains it is to be expected that there will be some impact on the primary chain from all the extra processing the system is doing to handle all the additional chains.
p2pool has 10 second longpoll times. High stales are likely to be expected. Does it consider a result a stale if it's stale on the altchain but not the primary chain?
Hmm, p2pool's console output is saying it has 8.4% stale rate and the p2pool network as a whole has 7% stale rate, and our percent has slowly been creeping down toward to overall network's rate though when running so many merged chains it is to be expected that there will be some impact on the primary chain from all the extra processing the system is doing to handle all the additional chains.
-MarkM-
-MarkM-
A bit complicated thing.
And I have 10% rejects :/
And I have 10% rejects :/
I'm testing the pool. How all of the merged coins would be transferred?
Converted to DeVCoins and sent to the miner's bitcoin address, since devcoin address and bitcoin address are the same.
In principle other means are technically possible but this is the simplest most straightforward method.
If that method does not suit you, then it is probably a good idea to try to get an Open Transactions client set up and running so you can make use of my Digitalis Open Transactions server, which handles so far all of the currently merged chains except for coiledcoin (which might, arguably, be dead) and also all the chains that decided, in the face of the massive hostility being shown to merged chains, to retreat to Open Transactions format leaving GRouPcoin still out in the world as a blockchain so they can watch how GRouPcoin gets along and use it to guage at what point it will become reasonable to move back to blockchain format.
-MarkM-
Jump to: