I got a quote from them for a cube. fuckers wanted .7813 btc for a cube they said $799 plus $37 that should be about .65 btc they are asking $1010 US
yeah with the expected difficulty rise i see in X11 stuff because of them..that is not gonna happen....852 with shipping to usa for a cube that now will likely take close to a year to ROI...I may just wait for this difficulty wave to pass and/or bigger units like the A900 this lemming at that price is gonna split off and just keep his 1 300mh mini as a toy ...sometime in the future at a lower price new or used .if all I'm using for is fun anyway so they may have shot themselves in the foot ...I was gonna split 4 with a buddy now we likely won't get any due to this and the general cluster that is baikals universe sheesh I don't think will be that long for ROI even with incresing difficulty... maximum 150-200 days. And I think dash will rise the price as well. This was part of my thinking as well. Of course there is no guarantee but the hope would be that the X11 coins are increasing in value helping to shorten the ROI. |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry to see people having issues, I hope it all gets sorted out soon. Seems like a pretty good miner and I'd like to get one, but the website always showed them out of stock. I wasn't even aware they were asking people to use email / skype...I'll just hold off until the website is fixed and they have inventory again.
|
|
|
|
+ people want to get the compound interest of the monthly distributions  I agree, I believe this to be the main reason for the recent price increase. It's still relatively cheap so why not acquire more to build your share more quickly. |
|
|
|
|
I'm still not sure where the dontation talk comes from. I know I'm not looking for anything for the work I've done and I believe EK has continued to say he is not looking for anything.
I think the task at hand is to figure out as a community how you can fund future devs (I may or may not take part, but that is future coding...not what's already been done), marketing / pr programs, etc.
And I personally would be strongly against requiring participation...let people choose whether or not to participate.
|
|
|
|
The service is unavailable. sol page  anyone else? i can log in and do a few transatcion on bittrex now,, and its fine in my place there is no problem with bittrex Same here, works fine for me. |
|
|
|
Hi EK, can you please confirm if this was due to something the miner sent or is it an issue in only the core server? I checked the miner code and I don't see how it could send more than 32 bytes.
Took me a few days to find out, but the bug was the following: The core server only allows a hash of max. 32 byte length in the BountyAnnouncement transaction. When something longer than that was tried to be added, the hash was simply set to null: PiggybackedProofOfBountyAnnouncement(final ByteBuffer buffer, final byte transactionVersion)
throws NxtException.NotValidException {
super(buffer, transactionVersion);
this.workId = buffer.getLong();
final short hashSize = buffer.getShort();
if ((hashSize > 0) && (hashSize <= Constants.MAX_HASH_ANNOUNCEMENT_SIZE_BYTES)) {
this.hashAnnounced = new byte[hashSize];
buffer.get(this.hashAnnounced, 0, hashSize);
} else {
this.hashAnnounced = null;
}
} When signing such transaction, which came in from via HTTP, everything appearently went fine ... the core server just signed the BountyAnnouncement with empty hash and submitted it. The verification worked fine as well because Attachments have no verification themselves. The problem happened in the rebroadcast. Imagine someone originally attached 33 bytes (instead of 32) in the hash, then the hash would be nulled - hash has length zero. But the original transaction is still broadcast in its original form causing 33 extra "unexpected bytes" to be over after parsing the TX. This is what the error that you posted earlier stated. I fixed it and learned ... variable length input sucks a lot. Tried to port many features to fixed length inputs (as you can see from my commits today). However, 33 bytes must have come from somewhere, i.e., the miner. I suspect an extra byte for a minus sign maybe? Thx for the explanation. Many months back we had this same issue and it was due to a negative sign in the miner...thought I got rid of that issue. I'll take a look again and get it fixed. |
|
|
|
Just thinking out loud: do we really need the bounty announcements in the new SN scheme?
It depends on how well the SN can handle a huge volume of submissions...but I believe it will have to do this either way. Yesterday, I submitted a job that had an issue which allowed every pass of the interpreter to find a "Bounty", so the miner tried to send hundreds of submissions pretty quickly....this is something anyone could do (i.e. create a simple job that allows legitimate bounty submissions to spam the SN). So I thought your original design had a small fee on each of these submissions, along with the announcement in order to deter this kind of behaviour. But if you have another approach that simplifies things, I'd be all for it. Well, first of all a job has a natural bounty limit ... submissions beyond this level are not permitted. But of course, there is a grace period between the submissions and their actual inclusion in the blockchain (or its unconfirmed transaction cache). In this time window it is possible to flood as much as you can. We could add a "SN rate limit" which would allow not more than x transactions per node per second. What sucks more is the lack of direct feedback from the SN. Since we queue at the moment, the miner does not even know if his submission was dropped, accepted or denied. We really have to think this through! Is queuing the right way to go at all? Btw: I could reproduce your bug today. I just could not yet find out why it happens. Fixed that bug. We will have to make sure that hashes and multiplicators are at most 32 bytes long ... not 33 like it could happen before. Fix is here: https://github.com/OrdinaryDude/elastic-core/commit/b95596e572af659cb7355a68643a58098579109fExtra checks in API are here: https://github.com/OrdinaryDude/elastic-core/commit/4870aa5c22786e27fbfdc37665a45e82f99410c9Do not use that yet! Hi EK, can you please confirm if this was due to something the miner sent or is it an issue in only the core server? I checked the miner code and I don't see how it could send more than 32 bytes. |
|
|
|
Is queuing the right way to go at all?
I don't really see any way around it, but maybe some other bright minds around here can come up with a solution. But the bottom line is we can easily have complex jobs that take considerable time to solve, and each submission would need to be validated. For example, if I create a job that takes 0.1 sec to solve, and I dump 1000 submissions onto a SN, that node would be tied up for 2 minutes before it could do anything else. And this will take place while people are dumping hundreds if not thousands of legitimate POW submissions on the SN. I still don't know of a good solution...I still wish we didn't have POW in xel and just focused on bounties. I know you'll say we need the POW logic ;-) I'm just not convinced, and I feel like it just complicates the validation / targetting / volume issues. Are users allowed to dump submissions to nodes of their choice? With many SNs in the network all those submissions could be handled by (probably) tens of SNs simultaneously right? Assuming the jobs are being spread evenly between all SNs, is it really a problem at all? I think jobs must be checked by at least a portion of SNs, otherwise a SN could send bad jobs, be it by accident or with malicios intent. So, to check a SNs integrity, other SNs have to check what a SN does. Whether all SNs have to check all jobs, I don't know. That is not correct, the current design does not require multiple SNs to validate a job.. |
|
|
|
Is queuing the right way to go at all?
I don't really see any way around it, but maybe some other bright minds around here can come up with a solution. But the bottom line is we can easily have complex jobs that take considerable time to solve, and each submission would need to be validated. For example, if I create a job that takes 0.1 sec to solve, and I dump 1000 submissions onto a SN, that node would be tied up for 2 minutes before it could do anything else. And this will take place while people are dumping hundreds if not thousands of legitimate POW submissions on the SN. I still don't know of a good solution...I still wish we didn't have POW in xel and just focused on bounties. I know you'll say we need the POW logic ;-) I'm just not convinced, and I feel like it just complicates the validation / targetting / volume issues. Are users allowed to dump submissions to nodes of their choice? With many SNs in the network all those submissions could be handled by (probably) tens of SNs simultaneously right? Assuming the jobs are being spread evenly between all SNs, is it really a problem at all? Yes, I can target all my submission to a specific SN. I'm not suggesting anyone do this, but it has to be accounted for that someone could do it. |
|
|
|
Is queuing the right way to go at all?
I don't really see any way around it, but maybe some other bright minds around here can come up with a solution. But the bottom line is we can easily have complex jobs that take considerable time to solve, and each submission would need to be validated. For example, if I create a job that takes 0.1 sec to solve, and I dump 1000 submissions onto a SN, that node would be tied up for 2 minutes before it could do anything else. And this will take place while people are dumping hundreds if not thousands of legitimate POW submissions on the SN. I still don't know of a good solution...I still wish we didn't have POW in xel and just focused on bounties. I know you'll say we need the POW logic ;-) I'm just not convinced, and I feel like it just complicates the validation / targetting / volume issues. |
|
|
|
Just thinking out loud: do we really need the bounty announcements in the new SN scheme?
It depends on how well the SN can handle a huge volume of submissions...but I believe it will have to do this either way. Yesterday, I submitted a job that had an issue which allowed every pass of the interpreter to find a "Bounty", so the miner tried to send hundreds of submissions pretty quickly....this is something anyone could do (i.e. create a simple job that allows legitimate bounty submissions to spam the SN). So I thought your original design had a small fee on each of these submissions, along with the announcement in order to deter this kind of behaviour. But if you have another approach that simplifies things, I'd be all for it. |
|
|
|
EK, I've noticed a couple things running the miner against the testnet: 1) Without SN logic to validate the ElasticPL, authors can upload corrupt jobs. There is one out there right now...so I added a temp fix to the miner to ignore these. 2) We will need to revisit the starting Target, maybe base it on WCET. I mined a slow job like the TSP example and got no POW in 5 minutes of mining due to the low hashrate on a complex job...and because I got no POW, the server had no idea I was there and didn't lower the target. 3) Next I switched over to a simple/meaningless job. if((m[7] >= 0) && (m[7] <= 100)) {
m[20] = 10;
m[21] = 20;
}
else {
m[20] = 11;
m[21] = 21;
}
verify (m[20]==10);
Everything from the miner side looked fine, but after a minute or so the connections dropped and I got the following errors: 2017-04-10 20:52:29 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: [SIGN] Broadcasting TX: 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
2017-04-10 20:52:29 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: Transaction 2515125811393853397 is relayed to SN.
2017-04-10 20:52:31 INFO: TransactionImpl.<init>: [SIGN] Signing HEX: 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
Json Trans.: {"senderPublicKey":"964be53db0cc61dd465fa765b03651c1bb06c7ce6b738be739ee1f143ea1910f","attachment":{"version.PiggybackedProofOfWork":1,"id":"30038704989302639","multiplicator":"c7eaf6050000000000000000000000009967565d7cb599bc"},"subtype":2,"amountNQT":0,"signature":"808b4f02ce59eb488a8592f080a62c9bbd0eed2fe1dc8ba9a24b83274bbe9602fd144a59ced55a871dc00a32595745dfe06e7ba48d8ff68bb7be940c3725c9f0","feeNQT":0,"ecBlockHeight":1156,"type":3,"deadline":3,"version":1,"timestamp":106577551,"ecBlockId":"3303192259792883105"}
Trans. IDNR: 7604604596790863556
2017-04-10 20:52:31 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: [SIGN] Broadcasting TX: 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
2017-04-10 20:52:31 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: Transaction 7604604596790863556 is relayed to SN.
2017-04-10 20:52:37 INFO: TransactionImpl.<init>: [SIGN] Signing HEX: 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
Json Trans.: {"senderPublicKey":"964be53db0cc61dd465fa765b03651c1bb06c7ce6b738be739ee1f143ea1910f","attachment":{"version.PiggybackedProofOfWork":1,"id":"30038704989302639","multiplicator":"7d043e06000000000000000000000000a000d204b55614ae"},"subtype":2,"amountNQT":0,"signature":"5bc35c3c89ed59de5ab955a0f6de4ce91ad585201727bedce09f137e9e43e102e7f2d7ea576f28416ff0b1c2985fea1e51d1f6399615af49ce1e89cc71e14e92","feeNQT":0,"ecBlockHeight":1156,"type":3,"deadline":3,"version":1,"timestamp":106577558,"ecBlockId":"3303192259792883105"}
Trans. IDNR: 13246459442309955219
2017-04-10 20:52:37 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: [SIGN] Broadcasting TX: 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
2017-04-10 20:52:37 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: Transaction 13246459442309955219 is relayed to SN.
2017-04-10 20:52:45 INFO: TransactionImpl.<init>: [SIGN] Signing HEX: 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
Json Trans.: {"senderPublicKey":"964be53db0cc61dd465fa765b03651c1bb06c7ce6b738be739ee1f143ea1910f","attachment":{"version.PiggybackedProofOfBountyAnnouncement":1,"id":"30038704989302639","hash_announced":"b4f95365e8fb345e357c35bcc4e58cc99015759ce5fee19701b51096f0494baf"},"subtype":4,"amountNQT":0,"signature":"35696b86aba0e633fae00852d0022899b769cbd8f6eaf3059246669342f600006b5bcc2b578c10c5a89464179da2999eb71e0a9d554fb33eb70a30c4e4df71f5","feeNQT":0,"ecBlockHeight":1156,"type":3,"deadline":3,"version":1,"timestamp":106577565,"ecBlockId":"3303192259792883105"}
Trans. IDNR: 9573744148325208918
2017-04-10 20:52:45 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: [SIGN] Broadcasting TX: 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
2017-04-10 20:52:45 INFO: TransactionImpl.checkSignature: [SIGN] Verifying HEX: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
Zero'ed HEX: 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
Json Trans.: {"senderPublicKey":"964be53db0cc61dd465fa765b03651c1bb06c7ce6b738be739ee1f143ea1910f","attachment":{"version.PiggybackedProofOfBountyAnnouncement":1,"id":"30038704989302639","hash_announced":"b4f95365e8fb345e357c35bcc4e58cc99015759ce5fee19701b51096f0494baf"},"subtype":4,"amountNQT":0,"signature":"35696b86aba0e633fae00852d0022899b769cbd8f6eaf3059246669342f600006b5bcc2b578c10c5a89464179da2999eb71e0a9d554fb33eb70a30c4e4df71f5","feeNQT":0,"ecBlockHeight":1156,"type":3,"deadline":3,"version":1,"timestamp":106577565,"ecBlockId":"3303192259792883105"}
VERIFY RESULT: true
Trans. IDNR: 9573744148325208918
2017-04-10 20:52:45 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: Accepted new transaction 9573744148325208918
2017-04-10 20:52:58 INFO: TransactionImpl.<init>: [SIGN] Signing HEX: 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
Json Trans.: {"senderPublicKey":"964be53db0cc61dd465fa765b03651c1bb06c7ce6b738be739ee1f143ea1910f","attachment":{"version.PiggybackedProofOfWork":1,"id":"30038704989302639","multiplicator":"a6032307000000000000000000000000867e888a050c7859"},"subtype":2,"amountNQT":0,"signature":"8e5f0ec7d5e9d69d8ff46774e3031c1c85e52d2fbcdcf360e24302a7ceae1a0a8b377ed1675380ee930da07c7aa23d04645259d50d6e67ad302492748d6e6f08","feeNQT":0,"ecBlockHeight":1156,"type":3,"deadline":3,"version":1,"timestamp":106577579,"ecBlockId":"3303192259792883105"}
Trans. IDNR: 1416522640852673254
2017-04-10 20:52:58 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: [SIGN] Broadcasting TX: 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
2017-04-10 20:52:58 INFO: TransactionProcessorImpl.broadcast: Transaction 1416522640852673254 is relayed to SN.
2017-04-10 20:55:31 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:55:51 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:56:11 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:56:31 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:56:51 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:57:11 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:57:31 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:57:51 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:58:11 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:58:31 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:58:51 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:59:11 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:59:31 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
2017-04-10 20:59:51 SEVERE: TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175: Error removing unconfirmed transactions
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:87)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.lambda$new$175(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:207)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$$Lambda$26/7313060.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:67)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:108)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$2.load(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:98)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable.lambda$getManyBy$4(EntityDbTable.java:294)
at nxt.db.EntityDbTable$$Lambda$65/16868041.get(Unknown Source)
at nxt.db.DbIterator.next(DbIterator.java:82)
... 9 more
Caused by: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Transaction bytes too long, 33 extra bytes, TX type = 3:4
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:279)
at nxt.TransactionImpl.newTransactionBuilder(TransactionImpl.java:291)
at nxt.UnconfirmedTransaction.<init>(UnconfirmedTransaction.java:60)
... 14 more
|
|
|
|
By the way, I hope coralreefer is still here and follows this thread. He is seriously the brightest and most intelligent person I have met so far. I am nothing compared to him. Maybe he want to take a look at the whole thing, when we think we have sorted out everything. I am sure that IF someone is capable to find deeply hidden bugs, it's him!
EK, thank you for the kind words....I am just a code monkey like you...we have different, but complimentary skill sets....but I agree together we make a great team. You know I like to work on challenging problems so please feel free to PM me with some details and I'd be happy to take a look...Hopefully, I can help out. But, as I've mentioned before, I received several PM's, etc that accused me that because I built the miner "for fun" that I was misleading people and had access to the ICO funds, which I found quite insulting...I have never attempted to mislead anyone about my intentions here...everything coded to date was because I found it enjoyable and did it because I believed in the project....I do not have any access to the ICO funds! So going forward, (to put these critics to rest and because this project has drug on so long), I won't be doing any future serious coding/enhancements on XEL without a bounty tied to it. |
|
|
|
i want to get one community feedback
how u like masternodes?
optional increased anonymity transactions?
would u like to see that stuff in DMD 3.0 ?
I think that this is an excellent addition, if it will go as a separate option. Now some coins are experiencing strong demand due to anonymity, but I think that in the future many coins will have such an option WOW masternode is the best choice right now . And when will be DMD 3.0 ? Masternode i like that , please do it but say first here _ so i will buy now more and more DMD  we look for the feedback of more people but yes chances are very high it will come but the MN enable amount will be a a pretty nice number of DMD so if u wana gather better start gather early we see a network with 100-200 masternodes very suited for the tasks and we expect like 50% of total coins will be used in masternodes..... Cryptonit, can you please explain how the masternodes would work and what they would add to dmd. I've followed this thread for a while and mined some dmd but I'm not sure what purpose a masternode would serve here. That just doesn't seem like the niche dmd is going for... |
|
|
|
Off topic, but what are those new currency symbols under everyone's name? I don't even hold Lite Coin nor Ion, how did that just show up?
You mean you aren't actually an "ION Appologist" I think it's just an April fools joke by the admins. |
|
|
|
|
The badges are hilarious, especially the ones that are completely opposite of what the members view are :-)
|
|
|
|
Take into account that using idle computing power (Such as will be done with a system like elastic) means using this power which would otherwise be going to waste, for (mostly) good - creating something / research / progression / a forward movement - this is by all means green (environmentally speaking) and as such the green color may be more than suitable. In addition green symbolizes growth and this again is very much compatible with the principles of the project.
Other than that, blue has been used too much in logos to date, and although orange has some positive relevant connotations, i do believe that the green aspect of our soon to be working system is 1st in importance (also when considering the pr side of things).
Modern computers use very little electricity when idle. Having a process consume your cpu cycles that would otherwise remain idle is far from free. I'm also not sure where the idea of elastic uses idle CPUs came from. The miner I wrote runs as fast as it can using all the resources available. It will consume quite a bit of electricity just like any other miner. |
|
|
|
Anyone know a good wallet that will be able to claim the coins ? I heared you need to send a added message right ?
EK has posted an online signer at the following location... https://ordinarydude.github.io/offline-bitcoin-signer/This is all you need to sign your message if you have the private key. |
|
|
|
Hi everyone, I'm somewhat lost between docker, elasticPL, mining and core. What do I need to install ONLY to test the wallet in testnet in Ubuntu?
thank you very much
I think it's enough to compile elastic-core and elasticPL. At least this is what I have on my side and it works. Haven't tried with docker I don't believe ElasticPL is being used anymore. My understanding is the the ElasticPL logic in the miner is going to leveraged instead. So ultimately, you'd just need core (and the miner if you want to mine). Docker is just an automated way to install / launch the core server. |
|
|
|
Nice work by rallier. It's great to see additional people making contributions to the project. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
