Topic: Vertcoin - First Scrypt N | First Stealth Address - Privacy without mixer - page 280. (Read 1232732 times)

Yes, i understand how p2pool works. The question is about p2pool software - what is different? i mean functionality, used ports, etc.

Basically, they are the same (and not). Traditionally, p2pool is considered as one worldwide network, one for given coin. But problem is, it's not scaling well if it's hashrate increases. And this is the problem with VTC as p2pool is very successfull with Vertcoin. So, now running '1st' p2pool can be considered as one big pool based on p2pool technology. '2nd' p2pool can be treated as another pool, using same technology, but with it's own nodes and hashrate. This is important as global p2pool hashrate is impacting share difficulty for miners, higher global hashrate means higher share difficulty. With higher global hashrate, you have higher chance of getting block, but also lower chance of getting share for individual miner. And this is problem with current p2pool network, you have chance to have block every 20 minutes, but chance to get share in 3 hours when mining with 1Mhs. That leads to high variance, some miners sometimes get nothing for all day mining, just because being unlucky.

To be short, p2pool = technology to create decentralised pools, p2pool network = network of p2pool nodes cooperating together to create pool, there should not be only one network, some nodes can create one network, some another. Miner can then use node of his own choose, if he prefer higher global hashrate of pool or lower share difficulty, which depends on network parameters to which particular node connects.

6X R9 270X MSI GAMING
1M/S

"intensity" : "18",
"worksize" : "256",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1480",
"shaders" : "800",
"thread-concurrency" : "11112",
"expiry" : "30",
"gpu-threads" : "1",
"scan-time" : "1",
"gpu-fan" : "48",
"vectors" : "1"

0.01% HW
WHY
when it change thread-concurrency to ohers
It was all HW..

"failover-only" : true,
"no-pool-disable" : true,
"gpu-threads" : "2",
"xintensity" : "4",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"kernel" : "zuikkis",
"algorithm" : "adaptive-n-factor",
"thread-concurrency" : "8193"

^ That's for a 7950 optimized by The Stilt. I get around ~310KH/s.

watching.

M

What is the difference between regular p2pool and 2nd p2pool?

1st block mined on second p2pool network! Consider joining. More info here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5900672

Node here: http://lovok.no-ip.com:9171/

Source here: https://github.com/Lovok/p2pool-n/

Block info here: http://explorer.vertcoin.org/block/54610471bd9a2b4d30827ad871022233cd75fa8d834acaa919caf3278123237e

Just my 2 cents.....I've had a few machines in Boris' pool for several days and it seems to pay out nice. Cool little pool. Granted, the time between blocks is longer than the bigger pools (i have a couple on bitcrush too), but they're much bigger payouts when they happen, and it balances out in the end (or even a little better..). I'm probably also biased from 2 of my machines hitting blocks on the first day they were mining there    

Prolly gonna move some/all (not that I have a lot..) to P2Pool if it's worth it. Are the payouts really noticibly higher through P2Pool vs. traditional pools?

I note we've managed to get bitcrush down to 20% of the network - well done everyone. A little more work to do though still, as vertco.in (on which reg has been closed for some times) is still 25% or so - we need your help to keep the hashrate spread around so if you're mining there please consider moving to a smaller pool.

BTW - good to see people experimenting with a split p2pool architecture - we've discussed this recently in the dev group and essentially ended up going back-and-forth with some pros-and-cons, so it'll be good to get some data on results with the community-developed split system.


Repost of my earlier post pasted below:



In the name of being diplomatic and not making a fuss, I've held back on saying anything about this for a while, but now we need to talk about it.

While we've achieved fantastic things in terms of p2pool, and Vertcoin has the highest proportion of p2pool mining of any chain I'm aware of, we do have an issue with one or two pools, as Verters great work has revealed at http://www.verters.com/block-analysis

Namely, bitcrush and vertco.in are both rather too big. I have no doubt they are good pools (after all, so many of you wouldn't be there if they weren't) but that's not the point.

Some of you may believe, because it's called a 51% attack, that you need 51% of the network hashrate to do it. Not so - it's just that if you have 51% of nethash you can _ALWAYS_ do it. If you have less, you have a smaller probability of accomplishing it, in proportion to how small your hashrate is (ie. it's incredibly unlikely, but you could in theory do it with 1kh/s).

Let me put some figures on this for you:

With 25% of nethash (which is what bitcrush and vertco.in both have at present), the probability of an attacker successfully orphaning the commonly used 6 confirmations is about 5%. It rises exponentially though, and if these pools grow to 30% of nethash, they would have a 13% chance of accomplishing that attack. Let them get to 35% of nethash and it's a 28% probability.

On the flip side however, it doesn't take a massive reduction in their hashrate to vastly reduce that probability - for example, with 20% of nethash a pool has only a 1.5% probability of accomplishing such an attack, and at 15% of nethash it's down to a much more acceptable 0.2% probability.

The other issue is, two big pools could in theory collude. I am personally satisfied this is no issue here, because I know that Bushido runs vertco.in and is not about to attack his own coin, but it still is an issue, and we shouldn't need to trust anyone here - the whole point of this is to make things trustless and secure by design.

I'm very proud of the way we've managed to get the p2pool adoption in VTC so strong, but let's not rest on our laurels - there is still much work to be done. Please consider moving if you're on bitcrush or vertco.in, preferably to p2pool.

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://p2pool.vertcoin.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.

If you don't wish to use p2pool, at least try to join a smaller pool. Ideally I'd love to see everyone using p2pool but that's not realistically going to happen and it's actually not ideal for very small (ie. less than one modern GPU) miners, but even if we could get all the traditional pools down to at most 15% of nethash, that would be a very significant achievement.

Wow - I just looked at the SPV wallet project and saw it's 97% funded after ~24 hours! - Well done everyone for getting behind the project.

I haven't used any Visiontek cards so not sure on those, but if they're 280X then the settings are likely all the same except for finding that card's sweetspot on the gpu speed.

You should be able to get close to 1/2 the hashrate (or a couple % less) than you get for regular script coins. That's normal for VTC.

I've just used the vertminer (custom cgminer from the VCT homepage) so far. Seems to works good, but you have to take the default config file out of it's folder if you want to use a batch file for launch and config (otherwise the prog uses the parameters in the config file instead of what you put in your .bat). And in the .bat file, the command line needs to start as "vertminer.exe --script-vert........". If you leave out the -vert it'll drive you nuts wondering why it won't work    (This is compared to regular cgminer command line starting as "cgminer.exe --script ........")
 

It's a visiontec. Runs pretty good on scrypt coins, and now I got it working on vertcoin as well, but at a reduced hashrate.
Only getting about 328KH/s currently.
I followed the advise of a prior post to use sgminer. Downside is that this doesn't work with cgwatcher/cgremote.
Using TC 8193, XI 4, G 2, and 1500/1050.
So far attempts to boost hashrate have pretty much failed, seems that im near the peak speed for this card.

what are the manufacturer(s) and model(s)?

For Sapphire 280X Dual-X im using:  -I 13 -g 2 --lookup-gap 2 -w 256 --gpu-engine 1000 --gpu-memclock 1500 --thread-concurrency 8192  
and getting 345Kh/s per card. When increasing the gpu clock by incriments of 10, it falls off a cliff around 1020. At the stock speed of 1050 it performs very badly.

For Sapphire 280X TOXIC im using:  -I 13 -g 2 --lookup-gap 2 -w 256 --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memclock 1500 --thread-concurrency 8192
and getting 375KH/s per card. Stock gpu speed of 1100 is 'way off the cliff'. I think 1060 runs a bit faster and 1070 it falls over, so I like 1050. And on the memory, the Toxic's run at 1600 default, but at 1600 you can only run the gpu up to 1000 for 355kh/s before it tips over, so 1500 mem clock seems better for top speed.

For Gigabyte 280X im using same as Toxic, but lower gpu to 1020 for 365KH/s. Go much higher on gpu, and it tips over.

MSI 280X I still have running single thread (-g 1), as that's how I first found how to get my cards running decent and stable on Vert. But that only gives 300KH-ish, so I'm guessing that when changing to -g 2  the gpu clock will have to go down from its 1020 stock speed to like 980-ish for top hashing speeds.

EDIT: My MSI's are doing 365Kh each at stock speeds 1020/1500 (no need to underclock these guys I guess...) with TC 8192 (add or subtract 1 or 2 if you prefer)

So then add any other switches you normally use for fan and/or temp control, etc.

owner of this pool is a known scammer who ripped off many people on GNS coin by running off with 5 million prize fund.  He keeps making new accounts with new names to try and promote this lame pool constantly, be warned, use at your own risk.

1. Bitcoin - Very good developers
+ A great community of people that support the system as a mining, buy coins and spread the idea of ​​good coin all around the world

2. Litecoin - Very good developers
+ A great community of people that support the system as a mining, buy coins and spread the idea of ​​good coin all around the world

3. Vertcoin - Very good developers
+ A great community of people that support the system as a mining, buy coins and spread the idea of ​​good coin all around the world

_____

For all ALLCOIN is missing all things and they are only Pump and dump ... one moment they will prove at the bottom

Is this generally true, when comparing VTC to other Scrypt-N coins as well? Is vertcoin superior to Scrypt-N coins in general?

The technical mechanisms behind vertcoin are constantly in development, Bushido mentioned he has more plans from a technical perspective to implement in the future. Just because there are other coins with similar anti asic resistance in it doesn't mean there is a team behind it with huge improvement plans for it like vertcoin has.

Thats simple: community backing and development.