 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2]
|
|
tl;dr - The transaction finally went through.
Rescan didn't resolve the issue. After it completed I started getting an "unable to open wallet" error, which I googled and found some mention of having a corrupt block chain. So I deleted everything except wallet.dat and had the client resync. As that was taking awhile, I went to bed.
This morning I get up and see the same "unable to open wallet" error. I restart the client, and it looks like syncing to the block chain never completed (about 6k blocks left). BUT, I also have an email from Coinbase saying I received my bitcoins. Happened after I went to bed.
I guess I just needed to leave the client running.
Thanks for the help.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, thank you, that explains a lot.
I had one more though - How does the "network" decide to award the miner the coins? Or, does the miner get to just claim the related bitcoins as input to a future transaction, and other nodes on the network can decide if that input is valid for that transaction?
|
|
|
|
|
So it's like Yahoo answers, with Bitcoins offered as a reward by the poster?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I'm trying to wrap my head around mining and I think I get it, but I have a few questions I hope someone can shine some light on. I've read through many pages on the subject but didn't see these questions answered, or I just misunderstood what I was reading (definitely possible!).
- When a miner starts trying to hash a block of transactions, do they "choose" which transactions go in the block, or do they just throw in all transactions they've received that were not in the last block? I assume that they can, in theory, choose to ignore transactions that don't have fees, but does that really happen?
- While a miner is hashing a new block, which includes x transactions, how do they respond if a new transaction comes in? Do they include the new transactions and start hashing again, or do they ignore the new transactions?
- How does the nonce work? I'm currently under the impression that a block being hashed has x transactions which would result (always) in a given hash, so the miner changes the nonce so that they can get a new hash. Is that correct? Could they, instead, re-order the listing of transactions in the block, and would that produce a new hash?
- How does the network resolve forks in the chain? By which I mean two miners come up with two different, valid solutions to the same block, and push their changes to the network. Some clients receive new Block A, and some get new Block B. Those clients now start working on the NEXT block even while the new blocks are propagating, etc. It would seem that one solution will spread out faster, but how do clients following the "bad" chain fix the error? Do they look at a timestamp and select the earliest? Do they select the block with the most transactions?
Thanks for any elucidation.
|
|
|
|
|
What if they just wanted to destroy the network? Say some organization didn't like the idea of anonymous money, and just wanted to make it impossible to continue to operate.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe I read somewhere that when these all come online the hashing power of the entire network will go up by 80%. That's damn near the power needed to perpetrate a 51% attack. Forget mining - couldn't they just fork the block chain and double/triple/quadruple/etc spend?
|
|
|
|
|
Atruk, to answer your question, I believe I was using 0.3.something, and no, I don't think it was synced. I believe at one point the old client said something along the lines of 0/not connected? or 0/unconnected?
And thanks, I'll give --rescan a shot when I get back home.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I purchased some bitcoins back in April of 2011 and didn't do anything with them until recently. I had my wallet in my Windows 7 partition, which I don't use much anymore, but I logged in to see if I even still had my bitcoin wallet over there. Sure enough I did, and was still running an earlier version of Bitcoin-Qt.
I tried to send from that client to my new bitcoin address, but the transaction was stuck at 0/unconfirmed for over an hour. Figuring something was wrong, I upgraded to the latest Bitcoin-Qt, but everytime I tried to lauch it, it crashed.
Since I didn't want to stick around in Windows anyway, I copied my wallet.dat over to my Linux partition,grabbed the Bitcoin-qt client for Ubuntu, and overwrote the new wallet.dat with my old one. The client seemed to recognize the old transactions fine - but my balance says 0. The transaction I tried to send (ea0491518bb8c52f1ba514a67d5c67db0ed8ab70b78b2a19d1e1de5c9edc95c8 to address 15hVDzGnQdywsKWwmkjr2TwA83wDdYfcav) is still stuck at 0/unconfirmed.
I can't send the bitcoins again, the client says I don't have that much in my balance.
Anyway to tell the client to push the transaction to the network again?
|
|
|
|
|
