That's looking great be good to see it in action!

...
   Hello squidicuz.
   Nice to meet you.
   I would like to donate for your good performance in operating this node.
   Tell me which bitcoin address to donate.
   And by now also thanked you if you could clear the node list of shares that is already very long.
   Regards

So the alert was added along with BIP9 (version bits) and is triggered when:

> If at any stage 50 of the last 100 blocks have unexpected bits set, you get Warning: Unknown block versions being mined! It’s possible unknown rules are in effect.

It's likely the node is running either BU or bitcoin Classic and that is what triggered it. In an attempt to stay apolitical, if you support that you should stay there, if you don't, find a SegWit signaling node, if you don't care find a node that signals that (thanks to veqtrus's graph we now know that's ~90% of the P2Pool network).

Right now the node is mining valid shares and will continue to until a soft/hard fork occurs, at which point Forrest will likely release a hard fork of P2Pool.... after that it gets very political and messy so I'll stop there

Bitcoin addresses that start with a 3 are multisignature and have nothing to do with Bitcoin version, they are valid addresses.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multisignature

what is really strange is that the first block with low fees my node was set with txfees of .001, I was pissed that the block wasn't full so I changed txfees to .0001 and then mined a block with no fees
WTF!?!

Before activation my PR is compatible with older nodes. It doesn't accept segwit transactions in shares and the only extra check it does before activation (block weight instead of size limit) is exactly the same for non-segwit transactions.

BTW while we are at it, it would be possible to combine the segwit change with the ability to specify a P2SH address for payout. Are people interested in that? Or should we wait and update once segwit addresses are used?

TBH I loose a bunch of money running my node, however I'm an idealist and to me the bennifit of keeping the only trustless decentralized pool chugging along is the reward in itself.

I think we will see a P2Pool 2.0 soon, smart contracts will replace the share chain and allow many smaller miners to rejoin and earn rewards that don't equate to unspendable dust.

I'll predict that the days of centralized pools are numbered and that one day in the not to distant future we will see the majority of hashrate on some sort of smart contract based trustless pool.

In the mean time, for me at least, P2Pool is the only responsible choice...

I'm looking forward to spending some time making my node more useful, efficient and reliable in the coming weeks. Vacation ends Tuesday, and I'll be working exclusively on my node for at least a few days:)

Pull request to make P2Pool compliant with SegWit: https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/pull/327

Please help testing by mining on the Testnet.

i WANNA eat some SQUID !!!

how are you mate & the p2pool gang ?, long time no see, i;ve been around but at other sections.

sad to see p2pool not doing to well, but i will always support p2pool, a big holla to the guys around.

Pull request to make P2Pool compliant with SegWit: https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/pull/327

Please help testing by mining on the Testnet.

Pull request to make P2Pool compliant with SegWit: https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/pull/327

Please help testing by mining on the Testnet.

The donation should use P2Pool's patron_sendmany endpoint to generate the transaction.

It's better to send a single large tx as that will payout a higher percentage of miners, and include some smaller ones that would miss out on smaller amounts.

If we get to a 1BTC commitment level, I'll provide an address for the donations, and then link to the patron_sendmany transaction in the blockchain to prove I sent it.

Well that's a good question. I have a p2pool node over at the base, do I have to transfer bitcoins to the base wallet, then do a payment to all miners of .2, then the others do the rest of the .3 then shit gets done or should we all send it to one person's wallet who can do the whole .05?

I'm fine either way.

C

Doubled as well, someone get off their ass and kick in a .10

C

GitHub said he would investigate the account.

 But so far no one compensated me for damages ! 

Is it possible we have a bona fide fork in the p2pool share chain? That is, someone generated a share that was incompatible with v16, causing v16 nodes to reject it and fork away. That v15 chain continued building, and is the reason we're seeing massive influx of invalid shares on v16 nodes. New pools starting up now have a (small) chance of picking up the old v15 chain, which causes the v15 shares to get propagated to the network. As independent nodes connect to both v15 and v16 nodes, the poor performance we see starts to happen - massive lumps of shares appear, requiring huge CPU time to process, since they don't integrate neatly with the existing share chain. In the end, the incompatible shares are rejected, but they still take time to handle. (To be clear, this is just a guess at what's going on in terms of the big picture. Jtoomim seems to have a handle on the technical aspects of why the performance is poor.)

I have switched my nodes over to p2pool v16. The current hashrate is approximately 97% v16 over the last hour, and about 76% v16 over the last day. This means that anyone still on v15 will soon have their shares ignored by the rest of the network.