Pooled/Remote Mining - Open Source - Updated 2010-12-24 - page 7.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: bober182 on November 30, 2010, 01:53:51 AM

Can someone edit the first post to include the server IP so we can all join in this.
Also if the IP owner doesn't want to keep running it I will see if I can take over. Does This app work with domains instead of IPs?

I'm fine with keeping it running. It runs on a VPS which isn't doing much else. I'll be monitoring the CPU usage and bandwidth but it looks like it doesn't use much.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

Can someone edit the first post to include the server IP so we can all join in this.
Also if the IP owner doesn't want to keep running it I will see if I can take over. Does This app work with domains instead of IPs?

da2ce7

legendary

Activity: 1222

Merit: 1016

Live and Let Live

My GPU mining computer melted... (stupid Aussie summer heat)... One I have it back running (1 week approx) I'll volunteer to join for debugging.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

But in theory assuming the current difficulty does not rise.
50 bitcoins are generated per block for now. If your going at 1000khash and it takes 1 month to get the coins this sucks.
Meanwhile, someone going at 4000khash will make 4 blocks before you make one. So 5 blocks have been made in one month and you have 50 bitcoins and your GPU nemesis has 200 bitcoins. If you use correct pooling that measures not speed at generation but how many hashes generated. After one week you may not find the winning hash but GPU will. You get 10 bitcoin he gets the other 40. After the month has ended and you and him generate 5 blocks together. You will still have 50 bitcoins and he will have his 200.
All this does is divide the way bitcoins are generated to a quicker approach. A weak machine will only get its fair 50 after the time it would normally take to generate a coin. If every last bitcoin user joined in on a network bitcoins would tick in at a and even rate still giving GPU and server farms more coins then the rest but allowing CPU users to get a bit of coins before they die.
I truly hope there wont be a competition with the pooled mining teams and that the server doesn't start taking fees.

FreeMoney

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1014

Strength in numbers

Quote from: doublec on November 29, 2010, 06:47:16 PM

@davidonpda, I ran it previously but stopped since no one was using it and the client got outdated. I restarted it with puddinpop's recent version yesterday when I posted the IP address. The number of clients, as bober182 noted, has ranged from 2 to 10.

What's needed is a larger number of people to contribute (and hopefully someone with a GPU) so that the lesser powered CPU clients can start getting some benefit from being involved.

I'm not sure if that will happen though as the GPU clients are probably more likely to want to keep mining for themselves.

Even GPU generators are beginning to be exposed to some high variance and that will only grow.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

@davidonpda, I ran it previously but stopped since no one was using it and the client got outdated. I restarted it with puddinpop's recent version yesterday when I posted the IP address. The number of clients, as bober182 noted, has ranged from 2 to 10.

What's needed is a larger number of people to contribute (and hopefully someone with a GPU) so that the lesser powered CPU clients can start getting some benefit from being involved.

I'm not sure if that will happen though as the GPU clients are probably more likely to want to keep mining for themselves.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

When I got on at the beginning there was 2 others plus my two at around 2500khash then i later saw 6 at 3500khash and even 10 at 6000khash. Right now its 2 at 800 (only me).

puddinpop

member

Activity: 103

Merit: 17

Quote from: bober182 on November 28, 2010, 10:15:21 PM

Okay got it running
OS Vista Fully patched
Ram 2.5GB
CPU Intel Centrino 2 Dual Core Duo

Normally I get 800~1200 khash/s
but with this I get around 300,333,366,400,433 I'm assuming thats the weird way it shows speed.
I noticed that it uses one core only can this be fixed.
So I'm running 2 at a time to make up for that both at around 366+ this still adds up to the lower estimates of the normal client.

The calculated hash rate is averaged over a period of time, so it will start off low and increase until it approaches the actual hash rate. There is overhead in calculating the metahash, finding the best hash, and networking, so you won't get the hash rate you get with the vanilla bitcoin client.

Quote from: bober182 on November 28, 2010, 10:29:56 PM

You guys say its split based on the rate. Will this not mean if I have connect and disconnect a lot with my super mega fast client I get more then a non stop small guy. It should be done by the amount of hashes you computed to the amount it too to solve the block.

The distribution of payment is determined by which clients are connected at the time the block is created. If you connect and disconnect multiple times, only the last active connection will be valid. In addition, because of the averaging of hash rate over a period of time, the client will start off with a low calculated hash rate after each connection.

Quote from: doublec on November 29, 2010, 12:32:00 AM

puddinpop, there seems to be a typo in cmake-bitcoinr/CMakeList.txt. The references to 'bitcoind' in TARGET_LINK_LIBRARIES should be 'bitcoinr'.

Yes there is. All the bitcoind in that file should be bitcoinr.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

puddinpop, there seems to be a typo in cmake-bitcoinr/CMakeList.txt. The references to 'bitcoind' in TARGET_LINK_LIBRARIES should be 'bitcoinr'.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

You guys say its split based on the rate. Will this not mean if I have connect and disconnect a lot with my super mega fast client I get more then a non stop small guy. It should be done by the amount of hashes you computed to the amount it too to solve the block.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: bober182 on November 28, 2010, 10:15:21 PM

Okay got it running noticed that it uses one core only can this be fixed.
So I'm running 2 at a time to make up for that both at around 366+ this still adds up to the lower estimates of the normal client.

Will this work on guest accounts then I could run it at school.
Also how is the 50 BC split now.

Yes each instance of remoteminer only uses one core. The idea (I assume) is to run multiple instances for each core. It will always be a little slower than the normal client due to the communication overhead of talking to the remote server. It should work on guest accounts and the 50BC is split based on the khash contributed to the solution of each connected miner. puddinpop will be able to explain more on this since they wrote the code. I'll try and get a GPU miner connected to up the khash rate soon.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

Okay got it running
OS Vista Fully patched
Ram 2.5GB
CPU Intel Centrino 2 Dual Core Duo

Normally I get 800~1200 khash/s
but with this I get around 300,333,366,400,433 I'm assuming thats the weird way it shows speed.
I noticed that it uses one core only can this be fixed.
So I'm running 2 at a time to make up for that both at around 366+ this still adds up to the lower estimates of the normal client.

Will this work on guest accounts then I could run it at school.
Also how is the 50 BC split now.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: bober182 on November 28, 2010, 07:46:39 PM

What is the IP?
I just really hope no one from the forums decides to start making teams and starts splitting up generation that would ruin the point of this.

I have a server running you can connect to if you want to test it out. You can connect to it using the windows binaries in the original post. See http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/ for IP address and other details.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

What is the IP?
I just really hope no one from the forums decides to start making teams and starts splitting up generation that would ruin the point of this.

puddinpop

member

Activity: 103

Merit: 17

Quote from: bober182 on November 27, 2010, 07:15:46 PM

I'm down for joining this any one got a good tutorial to set this up on a windows PC.

It's not complicated at all. Someone sets up a server that is publicly accessible, and everyone else runs the miner client with the -server parameter set to the server's IP address. If the server operator wants to use a port other than the default, or have a password required for connection, you simply add those parameters as well when you run the client.

bober182

full member

Activity: 308

Merit: 100

I'm down for joining this any one got a good tutorial to set this up on a windows PC.

puddinpop

member

Activity: 103

Merit: 17

I've updated the initial post with the latest binaries and source based on SVN 191.

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: ?? on ??

Is there any way for the server to see about how many k/hashs the pool is generating combined?

It would be nice if the standard 'getinfo' returned the combined k/hashs in some way. The clients seem to get the information. It periodically prints it to the console.

ByteCoin

sr. member

Activity: 416

Merit: 277

Quote from: puddinpop on October 16, 2010, 03:00:21 PM

As far as verifying that the server isn't lying, I don't think that's possible with a multi client, single server architecture. The server can lie about anything to any client, and each client will be none the wiser.

If you publish the information on a web page then if the clients want to check they can get the webpage through a proxy server. You don't know which client is really asking for the information so you can't misrepresent the state on a per-client basis.

This, coupled with my signature and recipt scheme above prevents server cheating.

Quote from: puddinpop on October 16, 2010, 10:18:39 PM

Now you're getting closer to just sending every hash the client generates. I thought the argument was against that.

Suppose the default situation is to send the best hash out of four thousand million.
There's a big difference between now sending the top 100 hashes out of four thousand million and sending the four thousand million hashes.

I doubt you're seriously objecting to the extra bandwidth used by gavinandresen's proposal.

ByteCoin

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: LZ on October 16, 2010, 11:53:29 PM

Thank you, puddinpop! Someone succeeded to generate a block?

So far there are eight clients connected to my server. No blocks generated yet but I'll be interested to see what happens when a block does finally get generated.

Topic: Pooled/Remote Mining - Open Source - Updated 2010-12-24 - page 7. (Read 58999 times)