Messages

76

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 07, 2018, 06:02:15 AM »

It depends what you call botnet as it seems there has been different uses for that word around here. With the standard and used definition of what a botnet is,  it's impossible to know if the miners of this/these botnet(s) were upgraded or not and are therefore on the new chain (or not). They will eventually end up upgrading anyway.

There should only have been 1 chain until block 33400. Then those who didn't upgrade would have continued mining with PoBH and those who upgraded would have gone on a new chain with PoDC.

From what I understood, the new protocol (PoDC) was supposed to kick off on block 33400 and hence should have been the splitting point between those who upgraded and those who didn't upgrade (there is no such thing as the botnet chain/non-botnet chain, etc).

That did not happen and instead there was a split between those who upgraded and those who didn't upgrade waaaaay before block 33400 for other reasons  (haven't looked at the exact block but it happened at least 5 hours ago).

The block explorer is offline right now while I put it back on the chain used by people on version 1010002.

Right, I was using the Botnet chain as meaning the "other/old" chain. But PoBH chain would have made more sense.
Ok then so the 33400 block target number should be on the new/PoDC chain

77

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 07, 2018, 05:54:34 AM »

I would say that bot is already out of the "official" PoDC chain because we are getting our own confirmations (finally) and bot is 30 blocks ahead on its own chain. It can go on like that forever.

If bot tries to upgrade and hook to the "official" PoDC chain, he will mine by PoW until 33400 is reached (not likely as we are pretty close now).

Oh cool. So it is unclear if Sanctuary rewards from the previous 8 hours from bot chain will persist, but rewards on new chain (in last few hours) should

78

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 07, 2018, 05:42:25 AM »

My block explorer was supposed to switch to the new version right before block 33400 as this is what I understood was the cut off before a fork. It seems the chain forked waaaay before that block hence why you see different things znffal.

Yes for sure. Been a busy week!
Looks like your explorer is down?

So the botnet will be kicked due to mandatory at block 33400.
But 33400 on our chain or the bot chain?

79

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 07, 2018, 04:16:46 AM »

Ok so my MN in prod has been on latest version for 12 hours. I just got a payment. But looks like blockchain is divided because I see payment on Togo's block explorer but not Alex's. Also block numbers are different. Anyway main point is that we seem to be confirming transactions. I now have stakebalance!

Code: [Select]

"Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 110000
In my config file I have

Code: [Select]

gen=1
genproclimit=1
polpercentage=50
so should be using over 50% of my 110k stake...

But!!!!

exec getboincinfo

Code: [Select]

  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_RAC": 37944.24,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TEAM": 15044,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TaskWeight": 100,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_UTXOWeight": 25,
  "Total_RAC": 37944.24,

My UTXO is only 25. Should be 100, correct?

We are moving in the right direction!
By the way, the 33400 block number is the one on the old version? Then we are only hours away!

80

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 06, 2018, 03:27:09 PM »

Hi Rob,

I'm not sure how to do the coin control loop thing. But If I go to the transactions tab (Linux, qt mode) then I can see that my 110k transaction has >200 confirmations (image attached).

Since then the wallet has tried to send tiny payments to itself 3 times. All three of these have 0 confirmations. Again please see images attached.

Is that what you wanted to see? Otherwise could someone please help me to see how to do coin control and looping?

Thanks

Ah ok, I went to the send tab and I think hat is the coin control.
Image attached.

Interestingly, in here the 100k received transaction is in small bits and all have 0 confirmations...
SO I just wait until after the switchover block?

Thanks

81

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 06, 2018, 03:01:38 PM »

Thanks Luke, I appreciate it.

Jumping to the issue : exec podcupdate, with response: balance too low.
(Your right, the exec stakebalance is what podcupdate uses to make a utxo, so we need to get that > 0 first).
Could you please check the following, the stakebalance calculation is : Any unlocked coin with more than 5 confirmations.
Please go to coin control and loop through your Unlocked coin entries, there is a confirmations count on the right, see if you have any that are deeper than 5?  This will be interesting

Hi Rob,

I'm not sure how to do the coin control loop thing. But If I go to the transactions tab (Linux, qt mode) then I can see that my 110k transaction has >200 confirmations (image attached).

Since then the wallet has tried to send tiny payments to itself 3 times. All three of these have 0 confirmations. Again please see images attached.

Is that what you wanted to see? Otherwise could someone please help me to see how to do coin control and looping?

Thanks

82

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 06, 2018, 02:44:37 PM »

Hi Rob, all,

Sorry Rob I was asleep (we are in a funny time zone here at the bottom of the world!).

Firstly, this is an exciting day! Rob, you are doing a great job of what must be very busy, challenging, and potentially stressful. Thank you for your time and effort for what I think will be very very worthwhile.

Ok so this morning I checked and my TaskWeight =100 but my UTXO =0.
I have been in prod for with PoDC for the last two days over various versions and everntually taskweight always goes to 100, but I have never had UTXO anything other than 0, despite having plenty of funds in my address.

This morning I woke up, updated my PoDC wallet to the latest version, updated my sanctuary wallet (is now pre-enabled), and my controller wallet. So hopefully I am doing my share!

Ok, now that my PoDC wallet is updated, a few tests:

1.  exec getboincinfo

Code: [Select]

"Command": "getboincinfo",
  "CPID": "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701",
  "Address": "BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq",
  "CPIDS": "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701;",
  "CPID-Age (hours)": 422324,
  "NextSuperblockHeight": 33620,
  "NextSuperblockBudget": 760165,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_ADDRESS": "BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq",
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_RAC": 34231.68,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TEAM": 15044,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TaskWeight": 0,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_UTXOWeight": 0,
  "Total_RAC": 34231.68,
(I shortened the output here)
2. exec podcupdate

Code: [Select]

"Command": "podcupdate",
  "PODCUpdate": "Unable to create PODC UTXO::Balance too low."
3. exec stakebalance

Code: [Select]

"Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 0


As noted above, my receiving address which is linked to my CPID is   "Address": "BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq",.
Just to prove it has funds:
http://explorer.biblepay.org:3001/address/BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq


So I am not sure what the problem is... I must admit to being a little nervous.

Some thoughts, Rob I would appreciate advice as you have time.

A) Perhaps I should re-associate my CPID? I associated it in prod around 3 or 4 wallet versions ago. But Have never had UTXO...
B) If I type getaccountaddress ""  I get

Code: [Select]

B9a1HK9QxmpFRvUffcN7FjXT3odPdFBBJa
Which is a different one from my CPID address. Is this an issue for my UTXO?

Thanks

83

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 06, 2018, 04:03:45 AM »

Just an observation, not sure if relevant.
I have two receiving addresses in my PoDC wallet, A1, A2.

When I linked with Rosetta I only had one address, my CPID was linked with A1.
A1 contains my stake.

Somehow I managed by accident to create a new address, A2.

When I type

Code: [Select]

getaccountaddress ""
I get address A2 (the new default).

Rob, is this an issue or am I overthinking? Possibly the reason why my "stakebalance" is still 0?

Thanks
Luke

84

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 06, 2018, 03:38:58 AM »

I have been upgraded for 6 hours or so.

So far:

Code: [Select]

  "Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 0
(I have a decent balance in my wallet, same address as CPID)

exec getboincinfo:

Code: [Select]

"Command": "getboincinfo",
  "CPID": "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701",
  "Address": "BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq",
  "CPIDS": "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701;",
  "CPID-Age (hours)": 422313,
  "NextSuperblockHeight": 33620,
  "NextSuperblockBudget": 760165,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_ADDRESS": "BLLmyTDgsCtD2gC4dxpSXnFHnpVVewkEiq",
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_RAC": 31221.99,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TEAM": 15044,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_TaskWeight": 0,
  "8f273b30f8e0a298ed26e242762df701_UTXOWeight": 0,
  "Total_RAC": 31221.99,
  "Total Payments (One Day)": 0,
  "Total Payments (One Week)": 0,
  "Total Budget (One Day)": 0,
  "Total Budget (One Week)": 0,
  "Superblock Count (One Week)": 0,
  "Superblock Hit Count (One Week)": 0,
  "Superblock List": "",
  "Last Superblock Height": 0,
  "Last Superblock Budget": 0,
  "Last Superblock Payment": -1,
  "Magnitude (One-Day)": 0,
  "Magnitude (One-Week)": 0
So no taskweight or UTXO.

Maybe I just need to wait longer

85

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 11:47:39 PM »

Hi all,

I see in the pool that Proof-of-BibleHash block mining still gets full block rewards - when will we cut to the new 10% for proof-of-loyalty/proof-of-work?
Or I have misundestood this?

Best regards,
Simon

Hi Simon, still a few days until we switch over to PoDC. Block 33620 I think

EDIT: Block where PoDC starts is 33,440.
(33,620 is first superblock payment block)

86

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 09:17:47 PM »

1.1.0.2 for Linux is out there.

Windows is still compiling.

- Show correct error in getmininginfo
- Prevent crash during miner start
- Prevent crash during getdifficulty
- Prevent crash during exec podcdifficulty

Tested on linux in prod.

No crashes! 


Nice one!

87

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 06:22:43 PM »

We found a block
33163 in prod now

Edit: Wow now we are moving! Block 33174

88

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 03:54:00 PM »

Wait, Togo we are not hard forking yet due to the cutover rules - thats going in at block 33440, but I do believe our chains are forking due to network segmentation.
We have one chain (of the existing current prod users who didnt upgrade + the botnet) and then we have the new chain (us).

Orbis, you should not be losing BBP.  Did you get it back after you synced?  The only way to lose BBP is if you *mined* on a fork.  You should have the balance you had before the cutover.


Hey guys, I found a relatively minor bug in 1099, so I need to re-build windows with v 1101 (1100 is not possible, due to the zeroes) anyway, the bug only affects people with lots of sanctuary funds- it turns out, the PODC Update is "trying" to calculate its available amount using the unlocked calculation (I had fixed this in a prior version, but this morning when we moved to GetBalance due to the complaints - it reverted this.) So basically the workaround is if you are on 1099, you can set a low polpercentage, and the system will work temporarily, but tonight please focus on upgrading prod to 1101 when we all upgrade.

"but tonight please focus on upgrading prod to 1101 when we all upgrade."

I will upgrade my PoDC wallet now.

Should we be upgrading our prod sanctuaries and controller wallets now also, or just wait?

Thanks

89

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 03:47:34 PM »

I just wanted to make one point.
We are currently top 10 Rosetta, we will soon be 2nd behind Gridcoin.

If, as we expect, some people will switch to us from Gridcoin (due to better potential returns) this is really good for the coin.
It means our personal PoDC reward goes down as we share the pie with more people, but it also means that there will be more people buying BBP on exchanges due to the uxto requirement. This is really good for BBP and we could see some consistent price growth soon (which is really needed for our budget, looks like all columns will be close to maxed out this month).

90

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

« on: March 05, 2018, 03:35:38 PM »

You can do a 'getblockhash 33152'

If you get this hash, you're in the same wrecked boat as us:
0b6062f664d324c169c77439b85bd0b1a20077f3f1739d9deaa9713eca72c7d1

You can find your ip if you google 'what's my ip' for instance But maybe it's not needed if you're on the same chain as us...

getblockhash 33152
0b6062f664d324c169c77439b85bd0b1a20077f3f1739d9deaa9713eca72c7d1

Not sure I want to share IP right now