archive snowblossom slack dev
prev 2018-06-06 next
2018-06-06 00:01:48
Fireduck
bazel clean
2018-06-06 00:02:04
Fireduck
Shouldn't make a difference but I'd try that
2018-06-06 00:02:51
Rotonen
tried that before, only shackleton craps up - ah well, do not need to build that anyway
2018-06-06 00:03:29
Fireduck
Might have been broken since the big reorg
2018-06-06 00:03:53
Rotonen
it was broken on master yesterday, i only tried to build as the new tag landed
2018-06-06 00:04:30
Rotonen
additionally you should provide 1) checksums for downloads 2) sign your distributables
2018-06-06 00:07:09
Fireduck
Yeah, you are right
2018-06-06 02:32:06
quantumblockz
@quantumblockz has joined the channel
2018-06-06 04:27:31
Fireduck
ok, I am going to code up a mining pool
2018-06-06 04:31:06
Clueless
sweet
2018-06-06 06:08:09
GitHub
[snowblossomcoin/snowblossom] Issue opened by guanlei1996
2018-06-06 06:11:38
GitHub
[snowblossomcoin/snowblossom] Issue closed by cluelessperson
2018-06-06 06:23:04
GitHub
[snowblossomcoin/snowblossom] Issue closed by cluelessperson
2018-06-06 10:03:00
Nuse
@Nuse has joined the channel
2018-06-06 15:47:45
Fireduck
Going to make simple PPLNS mining pool
2018-06-06 15:47:51
Fireduck
Hopefully today
2018-06-06 15:48:19
Fireduck
Going to have it expose some metrics to the explorer
2018-06-06 15:48:48
Fireduck
Did some plumbing for it last night
2018-06-06 18:28:45
Fireduck
I am making the pool protocol now. The question is, do I make the miner build the merkle proof to send back to the mining pool? This code is odd and if someone wants to write a miner in another language it will be a hassle.
2018-06-06 18:29:04
Fireduck
Or do I have the mining pool need the snow fields and check the work itself and build the proof if needed for a block
2018-06-06 18:29:34
Fireduck
I guess the problem there is then the mining pool needs all fields that could be in use since a miner could use any field they have that is at least the current required
2018-06-06 18:35:04
Fireduck
yeah, that settles it. mining pool can't be required to have all known fields on hand
2018-06-06 18:35:58
Tyler Boone
why not?
2018-06-06 18:36:19
Tyler Boone
not like we need to enable every nerd with a laptop to run a pool
2018-06-06 18:37:45
Fireduck
sure, but even with just what we have now that is 4tb
2018-06-06 18:37:58
Fireduck
and as soon as I have the ssd to do it, I'm going to build the next file
2018-06-06 18:38:03
Fireduck
so 8tb total
2018-06-06 18:38:06
Fireduck
that is a bit much
2018-06-06 18:38:49
Tyler Boone
the pool doesn't need all that exist (which is technically infinit)
2018-06-06 18:38:51
Tyler Boone
infinite
2018-06-06 18:38:58
Tyler Boone
just all that we've gotten to
2018-06-06 18:39:56
Fireduck
a miner may use a higher field if they want
2018-06-06 18:40:06
Fireduck
so kinda gotta be ready for anything
2018-06-06 18:40:21
Fireduck
I guess a pool could just reject it saying "no, that is dumb"
2018-06-06 18:42:33
Tyler Boone
correct
2018-06-06 18:43:09
Tyler Boone
any other advantages either way?
2018-06-06 18:43:37
Fireduck
not sending the proof over the network saves a little bandwidth
2018-06-06 18:43:39
Fireduck
but not much
2018-06-06 18:43:42
Tyler Boone
bah
2018-06-06 18:43:59
Fireduck
not sending the proof makes it easier to DoS a mining pool
2018-06-06 18:44:11
Tyler Boone
I was thinking about that myself
2018-06-06 18:46:18
Tyler Boone
the cost of calculating the proof is probably less than the cost of accepting the network traffic with the fake block
2018-06-06 18:46:58
Fireduck
negative. calculating the proof requires a good chunk of reading into the snow fields
2018-06-06 18:47:30
Tyler Boone
which a miner can do to the tune of thousands (or tens of thousands) of times a second
2018-06-06 18:47:41
Fireduck
And the fake submit from a miner would only be 30 bytes or so, yeah
2018-06-06 18:47:49
Fireduck
validating a proof is in memory and fast
2018-06-06 18:53:22
Fireduck
there is my proposed mining protocol
2018-06-06 18:58:16
Fireduck
It is good software engineering to just copy a class and change what you want right?
2018-06-06 19:50:14
Tyler Boone
@Fireduck, any thought to making the mining pool use json RPC or something to make it easier to integrate other languages?
2018-06-06 19:50:56
Fireduck
Yeah. Going to do grpc just so I can get this running but plan on opening a json Rpc port as well
2018-06-06 20:17:17
Tyler Boone
actually, that makes me think... probably the node is really the only thing that needs to be tied to the protocol buffers
2018-06-06 20:17:59
Tyler Boone
or even if the client and miner do use protocol buffers, they could take binaries drops and have a separate compile...
2018-06-06 20:18:29
Tyler Boone
might make tooling work better for things like debugging.
2018-06-06 20:21:10
Fireduck
Can make json interfaces for whatever
2018-06-06 20:50:40
Clueless
``` snowblossom@vmsnow1:/var/snowblossom$ source/snowblossom/bazel-bin/SnowBlossomClient configs/client-mainnet.conf send m0seqg6sxzvmyaynrq794zw64m4wcxhw5ljvaw3u 50 Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "m0seqg6sxzvmyaynrq794zw64m4wcxhw5ljvaw3u" at sun.misc.FloatingDecimal.readJavaFormatString(FloatingDecimal.java:2043) at sun.misc.FloatingDecimal.parseDouble(FloatingDecimal.java:110) at java.lang.Double.parseDouble(Double.java:538) at snowblossom.client.SnowBlossomClient.main(SnowBlossomClient.java:58) ``` Ah. send <amount> <address>
2018-06-06 20:53:20
Tyler Boone
you can open a bug to print usage if there is an error
2018-06-06 20:57:09
GitHub
``` snowblossom@vmsnow1:/var/snowblossom$ source/snowblossom/bazel-bin/SnowBlossomClient configs/client-mainnet.conf send m0seqg6sxzvmyaynrq794zw64m4wcxhw5ljvaw3u 50 Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "m0seqg6sxzvmyaynrq794zw64m4wcxhw5ljvaw3u" at sun.misc.FloatingDecimal.readJavaFormatString(FloatingDecimal.java:2043) at sun.misc.FloatingDecimal.parseDouble(FloatingDecimal.java:110) at java.lang.Double.parseDouble(Double.java:538) at snowblossom.client.SnowBlossomClient.main(SnowBlossomClient.java:58) ```
2018-06-06 20:57:33
Tyler Boone
thanks
2018-06-06 21:38:42
Rotonen
@Fireduck i'll gladly host a pool - i suppose multiple pools should go online at about the same time
2018-06-06 21:38:59
Fireduck
yep
2018-06-06 21:45:25
Clueless
That's 3 so far. :stuck_out_tongue:
2018-06-06 22:05:17
Fireduck
Look upon PoolMiner.java and weep
2018-06-06 22:05:25
Fireduck
What should I call the mining pool?
2018-06-06 22:05:47
Tyler Boone
snowplow
2018-06-06 22:06:14
Tyler Boone
snowpile
2018-06-06 22:06:23
Fireduck
hahah
2018-06-06 22:08:29
Fireduck
MrPlow
2018-06-06 22:08:53
Fireduck
The fun is, cp SnowBlossomMiner.java PoolMiner.java. Edit PoolMiner.
2018-06-06 22:09:07
Fireduck
cp SnowBlossomMiner.java MrPlow.java. Edit MrPlow
2018-06-06 22:09:15
Fireduck
There is so much fucked up code overlap
2018-06-06 22:09:22
Fireduck
but not enough to sensibly combine much
2018-06-06 22:09:29
Tyler Boone
that's how you deliver things fast
2018-06-06 22:09:57
Fireduck
It breaks my rule. If you have three copies of the same code, it is time to refactor.
2018-06-06 22:09:59
Fireduck
two is fine
2018-06-06 22:23:13
Tyler Boone
we shouldn't have a "memory miner" and a "disk miner"
2018-06-06 22:23:31
Tyler Boone
we should just have a miner and an "allowed memory" such that it will store as much of the snowfield as it can
2018-06-06 22:23:44
Fireduck
yeah, I was thinking about that
2018-06-06 22:23:58
Fireduck
not an LRU because it would just thrash
2018-06-06 22:24:05
Tyler Boone
I was going to implement it once I couldn't mine in memory anymore
2018-06-06 22:24:05
Fireduck
but maybe fill in blocks up to the limit
2018-06-06 22:24:14
Tyler Boone
yeah, just load from beginning
2018-06-06 22:24:20
Tyler Boone
until full
2018-06-06 22:30:39
Fireduck
right
2018-06-06 22:30:49
Fireduck
and count on the hashing to evenly distribute load