I can't give you a secure answer but I think that the node is chosen randomly (but I'm not sure).
No, if you run the latest version it will download from all available peers (after it has the headers). https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.10.0Which node you download from don't matter much anymore. The speed issue is a thing of the past, thanks to the headers first solution. As such I also expect that the QoS / Netlimiter issues are a thing of the past (unless somebody connects to your node only on purpose of course). interesting, I think I'll put that to the test later, re: connecting to default 8 nodes and see if I receive blocks fast enough. it'd still be slower obv if I couldn't get at least 6Mbps from all those connections, since that's about what I max out at when I synced with my server (was around blocks 150,000-250,000.. before and after that it was slower) Please report back with an update, would like to know how it goes. Don't particularly want to do it on my home computer, but I'm getting a new dedi within the next week or so, so I'll test it on that. Normally it takes about 2-3 hrs on an i7-4770 (connected to one IP) |
|
|
|
It gets this for me, Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable) Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable) Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable) Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable) ofc ipv6 is unreachable, since I disabled it in sysctl.conf. it's the same thing as when bitcoind was screwed and wouldn't start when ipv6 was disabled ed, oh, i let it run for a while longer and after the 10-15th try it stopped attempting ipv6 so working ed: well, sort of. Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 373 from relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 472 from relay server
Received transaction of size 373 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Received transaction of size 470 from relay server
Received transaction of size 616 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 521 from relay server
Received transaction of size 191 from relay server
Received transaction of size 258 from relay server
Received transaction of size 434 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Received transaction of size 438 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 223 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 437 from relay server
Received transaction of size 227 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 470 from relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 471 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
Received transaction of size 436 from relay server
Closing bitcoind socket with nogleg, error during connect (101: Network is unreachable)
I guess it's a bit annoying, it is also opening up some godawful amount of ipv6 sockets tcp6 0 0 ::1:54082 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54066 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54009 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54083 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54092 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54014 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54067 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54073 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54010 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54086 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54063 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54079 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54071 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54048 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54008 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54033 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54013 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54052 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54090 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54062 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54065 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54077 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54074 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54091 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54072 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54075 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54080 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ESTABLISHED 4226/relaynetworkcl
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54005 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54060 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54084 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54028 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54093 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54064 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54007 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54006 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54059 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54078 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54004 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54021 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54085 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54069 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54070 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54012 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54061 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54017 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54056 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54095 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54076 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54038 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54068 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54011 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54089 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54057 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54087 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54094 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54058 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54081 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54088 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54043 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
tcp6 0 0 ::1:54015 ::1:8333 TIME_WAIT -
I also have onlynet defined in my bitcoin.conf; onlynet=ipv4 that is proper text is it not? oh well. i put it on other machine with ipv6 activated, and now it looks like Received transaction of size 1337 from relay server
Received transaction of size 437 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 191 to relay server
Received transaction of size 191 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 436 to relay server
Received transaction of size 436 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 370 to relay server
Received transaction of size 370 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 584 to relay server
Received transaction of size 584 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 796 to relay server
Received transaction of size 796 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 472 to relay server
Received transaction of size 472 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 35985 to relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Sent transaction of size 192 to relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Received transaction of size 192 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 227 to relay server
Received transaction of size 227 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 615 to relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Received transaction of size 615 from relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 257 to relay server
Received transaction of size 257 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 403 to relay server
Received transaction of size 403 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 259 to relay server
Received transaction of size 259 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 436 to relay server
Received transaction of size 436 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Sent transaction of size 225 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Received transaction of size 225 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 405 to relay server
Received transaction of size 405 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 373 to relay server
Received transaction of size 373 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 226 to relay server
Received transaction of size 226 from relay server
Sent transaction of size 374 to relay server
Received transaction of size 374 from relay server
so it is essentially just sending transactions that I send it back to me. how much bandwidth does this consume? |
|
|
|
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make check-TESTS check-local
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
PASS: test/test_bitcoin
make[4]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make[5]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make[5]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
============================================================================
Testsuite summary for Bitcoin Core 0.10.99
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 1
# PASS: 1
# SKIP: 0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL: 0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
============================================================================
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
Running test/bitcoin-util-test.py...
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
CC src/tests-tests.o
CCLD tests
make check-TESTS
make[4]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
make[5]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
PASS: tests
make[6]: Entering directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
make[6]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
============================================================================
Testsuite summary for libsecp256k1 0.1
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 1
# PASS: 1
# SKIP: 0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL: 0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
============================================================================
make[5]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/bleat/install/bitcoin/src'
# ./test_bitcoin --t crypto.tests
Running 133 test cases...
*** No errors detected did I miss something? 456 test cases? 3 tests? this? # ~/install/bitcoin/src/secp256k1/tests
test count = 64
random seed = 12071984385075897441
random run = 1544165739024864173
dont see anything else |
|
|
|
I can't give you a secure answer but I think that the node is chosen randomly (but I'm not sure).
No, if you run the latest version it will download from all available peers (after it has the headers). https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.10.0Which node you download from don't matter much anymore. The speed issue is a thing of the past, thanks to the headers first solution. As such I also expect that the QoS / Netlimiter issues are a thing of the past (unless somebody connects to your node only on purpose of course). interesting, I think I'll put that to the test later, re: connecting to default 8 nodes and see if I receive blocks fast enough. it'd still be slower obv if I couldn't get at least 6Mbps from all those connections, since that's about what I max out at when I synced with my server (was around blocks 150,000-250,000.. before and after that it was slower) |
|
|
|
Sup Folks!
BTCGuild luck is way down, so I've been riding it hoping it would spike back up. Made a mental note that another 12+ hours without a block and I'm done/looking at options.
Two S5's - 2.5TH/s
AntPool? I know everyone hates ghash/loves ghash or slush... what say ye!?
The luck factor makes it more interesting, otherwise it's an exercise in drudgery why don't you try bitminter or eclipseMC? You may get lucky |
|
|
|
|
newer version of cgminer?
|
|
|
|
I found it, but now what should I do?
Post the pertinent lines of it here so maybe people can understand what the problem is? Last 50 or so?  |
|
|
|
He means your upload capacity. There have been cases in the past where Bitcoin Core used all of the upload capacity of the users' Internet connection. To the point of making browsing etc. impossible.
Netlimiter is a software for Windows that allows you to limit programs to certain speeds.
Oh i didnt knew that , thanks mate But no all good , i can play online games and browse just fine without issues Wait til someone on a vps or dedicated server tries to grab the blockchain from you. =p Well, you may be OK if you have 10Mbps + upstream. Not so with me at 768kbps. Netlimiter is cool to have, anyway. So much better than using QoS on router .. |
|
|
|
Are DOT and DAY pools also from China? Look, top-4 pools are chinese, unbelievable.
aren't all the major ASIC companies in china? it's like blue bell ice cream, they eat (use) all they can, and sell the rest a couple of them need to improve their peering badly *cough* antpool *cough* |
|
|
|
Let's take a look at the ping times from my miner to the pool: --- nastyfans.org ping statistics --- 57 packets transmitted, 57 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 115.153/144.510/277.534/45.255 ms An average of 144.51 would stop me from pointing a miner there if it were a standard p2pool node. Let's see where the server is. Running a traceroute shows the last hop in Germany. Well, that explains the ping time - I had to go to Europe  . Our friends on that side of the pond would probably be better served. I used a p2pool with 200ms latency for at least half a year. Bitcoin should have less interrupts than DOGE, but since DOGE is the one I remember.... DOGE had one minute block time avg. I don't remember for sure, but I think it also had 15s share time in p2pool. So on average, you'd get 5 interrupts a minute. At 200ms latency, that means at worst you'd be sent some new work, 0.00001ms later there would be a new share/block, requiring the server to send you some new work. So then you have the 200ms to receive the work, then 200 + a few more ms before you start sending this work back, just call it 400ms. Five interrupts a minute = 2000ms = 2 out of 60 seconds = 3.33% DOA. Bitcoin has less interrupts. Two shares per minute, right? Then the block that's supposed to be every 15m but on increasing difficulty is a bit faster. So you're talking less than 1.5% DOA there. anyway, lower orphan rate of having the pool in Europe more than made up for that for me.... though if I was in Europe, I probably wouldn't be too keen on using a p2pool in the US or Asia, since most the (good) p2pools are hosted in datacenters in germany, france, or the netherlands. |
|
|
|
Block chain download needs to be shrunk down and only have say at least 1 years of active transactions and then to be archived into another system where your wallet can access it by typing a command in and then calling to download archived transactions this way it would reduce the active size of the chain as it does not need to have such a large amount of data to download 20Gb and counting how many people wanting to download that on to their system. I dont think many like this and why they use places liek blockchain.info but poses more of a risk that way online wallet.
Hmm, it's more like 35GB (aha! just read above, oops) I purchased my first 100GB + HDD probably a decade or more ago? Bandwidth, well, I guess it depends on your location, but generally all these cable and DSL providers are all about downstream and give jack shit for upstream, at least in the US. |
|
|
|
|
Solar blast, as in a solar flare?
Well, I hope if you have a dedicated server up in the mountains somewhere that you're using ECC RAM! JUST IN CASE!
|
|
|
|
|
how much upstream do you have? might want to consider using netlimiter
|
|
|
|
Just a newbie question about........ Satoshi has answered this newbie question in 2008: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf (Section 8: Simplified Payment Verification) my pc is already with lacking space and I will not buy other HD Many people already have 29GB of RAM in their PC, 29GB of HD is just nothing. If you can't even spare 29GB to hold the blockchain, you shouldn't run a full node. Many.... as in maybe 3% or less of home desktop users? Shit, I only have 24GB of RAM. As for the HDD space, yes, 29GB of HDD space is nothing. Unless google fiber decides to come operate in this rural texas city I'm in, I'm relatively certain that bandwidth will always be my issue, not my PC specs. 768kbps upstream = detrimental to be running a public open node. How to have a wallet without run a full node? do you suggest some way? You really don't have 29GB of HDD space? anyway, I run a "full node" by just using connect= to one of my servers. That way I don't connect to anyone else & don't have my upstream saturated (& slow people down in the process) |
|
|
|
I have setup an Electrum server and i am now downloading the btc blockchain. The tutorial of Electrum tells me it is better to "close bitcoind for incoming connections".
I am not that good with iptables, so is there anyone who can offer me the string to put in iptables for closing bitcoind for incoming connections?
well, you could just set listen=0 in the bitcoin.conf file. i'd say you should change your ssh port, but I guess it doesn't matter if you don't mind log spam... have you checked /etc/ssh/sshd_config? maybe it isn't listening on port 22 netfilter is an iptables dependency, that should have the conntrack modules. boggle. |
|
|
|
|
first "public" ASIC as far as I know was sometime between jan-mar of 2013 (february, I think). that was batch one of the avalons. the people that got those made some crazy amount of money (even if they sold the bitcoins as they got them, it was something like $300 per day).
Was dry for a bit after that, then this ASICMiner company?? I think it was, started swindling people out of some godawful amount of money for some crap USB ASICs and what not... ofc they only sold at rates that made it more profitable for them to sell them off rather than mining with them themselves.
Not sure about that bizarre 2x jump. (maybe that was when mtgox got the price up to > $1000 or something)
|
|
|
|
Ok, so when using this to check my home node: https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/Sometimes I get this: <IP>:8333 is unreachable. While others I get this: <IP>:8333 /Satoshi:0.10.0/ Any ideas why, I do have a static IP. Could it be a propagation thing with my ISP since I did just "order" the static IP I think it was Monday morning 2/16/15 ? Edit: I know all my ports are open and working being forwarded to the right system since I can check it with the portforward.com port checking program and it always says open. Edit 2: It is also a new setup and the client is about 41 weeks behind still downloading the chain if that makes a diff with the connection issues or w/e you wana call it. When checking the node it does seem like it hangs a while before coming back with found / unreachable. Edit 3: The home node in question is also in a switch connected to the router if that makes a diff. I can put it on the router and move some cables around but would need to go out and get a ~6ft ethernet cable. Or just turn on the laptops wifi but I would rather it be wired. if it's still syncing it could be timing out then, so bitnodes would say 'unreachable' |
|
|
|
at first i saw that during sync there were thousands of orphan blocks. why? who broadcasts them still?
bump anyone? i'd really like to know why so much old and orphaned blocks are still distributed. i dont see any reason for this. or did i just misread my log? when you're downloading the entire blockchain, that includes orphaned blocks there also used to be a bug where it'd spit out some godawful amount of orphan blocks when you were DLing from several different sources. i think that was fixed, not sure |
|
|
|
you just announce the new txid by sending inv message to all your peers.
when they realize they don't know it, they will ask you for the data, using getdata message.
I would also add (since it is sometimes a point of confusion) that transactions you create are no different than transactions you receive from a peer in this respect. When your node learns of "something new" in this case a transaction, your node validates it, adds it to the local memory pool, and notifies peers by sending a INV message. I thought it was only broadcast to 25% of peers isn't that what trickle is for? (*and syncnode) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
