Why would I mine on this instead of p2pool? Or what is the usecase here I'm not seeing?
this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
9 points (90.9% liked)
Monero Mining
248 readers
1 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poll: do you think the devs of XMR should mandate p2pool?
I guess lemmy does not support polls...
Would be best if the protocol could somehow control pools by hashrate. So rewards were diminished the more HR the pool has as a % of the network. This is most likely not possible to enforce though.
Another option would be to somehow hamper the performance of giant pools so they are not profitable due to bandwidth or other infrastructure requirements.
I think p2pool will eventually take over because you will literally make more money mining there instead of any centralized pool
Correct, especially if you have a large amount of hashrate, that 1% pool fee may mean real money over the course of a year.
Plus if pools ever get pressured to KYC miners p2pool will be there to absorb all the refugees. P2P is the future of pool mining.
This.
If the economic fundamentals support p2pool then the money/power will follow. There will always be a holdout of users but such is the marketplace of ideas. Plus it'll make it easier to spot the glowies!
Hoping that p2pool gets some more noob-friendly coverage, guides and UIs to help this trend.
Honestly yes. Restricting centralizing pools is similar to restricting centralizing ASICs.
It seems to be not a miner but more like xmrig proxy but coded in go so potentially easier to host in a secure manner. I think its for people who want to run a pool. P2pool has drawbacks, latency destroys at least 1% of your hash power. P2pool is not solo mining either so if you wanted to mine solo on dozens of rigs maybe it would be beneficial to also run your own pool since most of the infrastructure is ready to go. I assume a lot of pool operators are running xmrig proxy on the back end but maybe not.
You can solo mine with p2pool and have all your rigs connect to it. You just need to change the sidechain name from default to something else in the config.
As for the 1% loss in hash power, where did you get this statistic, speculation?
Oh I think I have accidentally run P2Pool with other than default name. Once I noticed I was winning every share I just aborted.
I believe the creator mentions in p2pool documentation that latency on the side chain leads to a delay that results in about 1% loss of efficiency. I'll see if I can look it up.