post-merge updates: pow/mining #7109
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jmcook1186
requested review from
samajammin,
wackerow,
corwintines,
pettinarip and
minimalsm
as code owners
github-actions
bot
added
content 🖋️
59 tasks
wackerow
requested changes
Jul 25, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Paul Wackerow <[email protected]>
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 1, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 1, 2022
|
|
||
| Proof-of-work is no longer underlying Ethereum's consensus mechanism, meaning mining has been switched off. Instead, Ethereum is secured by validators who stake ETH. You can start staking your ETH today. Read more on [The Merge](/upgrades/merge/), [proof-of-stake](/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pos/), and [staking](/staking/). This page is for historical interest. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added spaces either side so we can use markdown syntax instead of HTML here.
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 1, 2022
| The Ethereum mining algorithm has undergone several upgrades since its inception. The original algorithm, "Dagger Hashimoto" was based around the provision of a large, transient, randomly generated dataset which forms a [Directed Acyclic Graph](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph) (the Dagger-part), with miners attempting to solve a particular constraint on it, partly determined through a block’s header-hash. This algorithm was novel because it had high memory-access bandwidth requirements but could be run using a modest processor, making it GPU-friendly but resistant to the type of ASIC-driven hardware arms race that could pose a centralization risk (more on [problems with ASICS](https://www.investopedia.com/investing/why-centralized-crypto-mining-growing-problem/)). After substantial upgrades to the algorithm, it was renamed to "Ethash". This renaming happened before mining began on Ethereum mainnet. Dagger-Hashimoto was a precursor, research algorithm that was not used on Ethereum mainnet. | ||
| Ethereum Mainnet only ever used one mining algorithm - ['Ethash'](/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/mining-algorithms/ethash). This was a successor to an original R&D algorithm known as ['Dagger-Hashamoto'](/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/mining-algorithms/dagger-hashamoto). | ||
|
|
||
| The algorithm is based around the provision of a large, transient, randomly generated dataset which forms a [Directed Acyclic Graph](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph) (the Dagger part), with miners attempting to solve a particular constraint on it, partly determined through a block’s header-hash. This has high memory-access bandwidth requirements but could be run using a modest processor, making it GPU-friendly but resistant to the type of ASIC-driven hardware arms race that could pose a centralization risk (more on [problems with ASICS](https://www.investopedia.com/investing/why-centralized-crypto-mining-growing-problem/)). ASICs for Ethereum mining were eventually developed, but the majority of mining on Ethereum was nevertheless done using GPUs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we just remove this section @jmcook1186?
The only nice thing I'd like to keep somewhere is the problem with ASICS information, though if it doesn't already, I think that can be covered in the mining algorithms page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Coming back to this, I feel the same way. I've removed it and created a card to add it to the mining algorithms page.
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 8, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 8, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 8, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
minimalsm
reviewed
Aug 8, 2022
src/content/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
updates
developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/mining/index.mdfor post-mergeRelated Issue
#7075