|
Should I be posting in the Counterparty forums instead?
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me why I might get this response when sending XCP?
{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "id": "0", "error": {"message": "Server error", "code": -32000, "data": {"message": "{'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22}", "args": ["{'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22}"], "type": "BitcoindError"}}}
Yeah, this just isn't going through. Syntax to counterpartyd is correct, in fact it's exactly the same as a previously successful transaction. Here is the raw transaction counterpartyd produces--rejected by bitcoind: 01000000028705906200b0d11087997cd3a29988febeefae3acd9b50210ae46defc49a6b1802000 00000ffffffffa3223ec192a0fbcdc12767b2f58ffaf2c518e8e36360157d3def6b52dd542d4b00 00000000ffffffff036c2a0000000000001976a91435ee14d3ff8ece097df4b5e5370d6908120bf 79688ac6c2a0000000000004751210326594aabcc23ade1f4d35641dec0461c89be318d6939ccd1 169cdeb7721fe6d0211c434e5452505254590000000000000000000000010000000002faf080000 0000052aed0070000000000001976a9140ea4be0d9f68eb471159d30516252cf49d8607f588ac00 000000 |
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me why I might get this response when sending XCP?
{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "id": "0", "error": {"message": "Server error", "code": -32000, "data": {"message": "{'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22}", "args": ["{'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22}"], "type": "BitcoindError"}}}
|
|
|
|
Okay, so it sent it back to myself? I was sending the XCP to myself, so it was a little hard to tell.
But does that mean that whenever I send XCP from an address, all the BTC will be emptied from it temporarily?
isn't that how bitcoin work? when you spend from an address, the whole amount has to go, and change will be back if any Yes, that's a limitation of Bitcoin, but there are workarounds. For instance, you can keep lots of small unspent outputs around in case you need to make several transactions from one address at once. Exactly how BTC transactions work is not something I know much about, but from the view of the user, this doesn't happen--it doesn't show up in listtransactions, and you can keep spending. I guess the BTC wallet handles all this stuff automatically. At any rate, what I'm getting out of this is if I try to send XCP twice in a row, I won't be able to the second time, because there won't be enough BTC in the account. How do I keep unspent outputs around? I'm not sure what the term means, technically. I don't suppose it would help if I funded the withdrawal account with many small transactions instead of one big 1 BTC one? |
|
|
|
|
Okay, so it sent it back to myself? I was sending the XCP to myself, so it was a little hard to tell.
But does that mean that whenever I send XCP from an address, all the BTC will be emptied from it temporarily?
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry guys, human error--I left the deposit/withdrawal daemon off overnight. Won't happen again.
Everyone's deposits and withdrawals should have gone through by now. Please contact me again if you're missing something.
|
|
|
|
|
When processing a withdrawal, Counterparty sent 0.99968280 BTC instead of 0.0003-something. (Txid: 2bcd9ce92cc5b2fa3c8dc61135cb5642cc2a30271a3f49ef31305d51f6b5ccef) I had recently moved 1 BTC to that address to fund XCP transactions.
I've worked so hard on this... but I can't add it to the exchange if it's going to randomly send people 1 BTC. Has anyone heard of this happening before?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm using the API.
I added db.setbusytimeout(10000) to util.py, when the database connection is allocated, and that seems to have fixed it. I'm going to let it run overnight, we'll see if it's still alive in the morning.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, now counterpartyd is throwing that error after about thirty seconds when I just start it up and do nothing. It does a little syncing sometimes first.
|
|
|
|
|
All right, the deposit/withdrawal daemon is working. Everything would be ready to go, but...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/<user>/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/counterpartyd.py", line 687, in <module>
blocks.follow(db)
File "/home/<user>/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/blocks.py", line 651, in follow
parse_block(db, block_index, block_time)
apsw.BusyError: BusyError: database is locked
Counterpartyd is now quitting with that error whenever I run the daemon. The daemon makes a zillion database accesses, it has to check everyone single user's balance. It's during that phase that this is now happening.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that explanation clears thing up. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not the withdrawals, it's the deposits. The exchange's XCP (or a sufficient portion to cover everyone's withdrawals) has to be in one place.
At any rate, I just finished writing some crazy bit of code to move all the BTC and XCP around. I think I'll just charge a withdrawal fee in XCP, since people are used to withdrawal fees.
Pending tests on BTC's slow block chain, everything should be about ready.
|
|
|
|
As far as I understand, the wallet isn't a protocol but a client side construction - and the protocol only recognizes as XCP as being held by such and such address, it is not aware of what other addresses may or may not be in the wallet.
But we're not talking about XCP. The address has XCP. I'm talking about the BTC needed to fund the XCP transaction. Address has 1 XCP, 0.0001 BTC. To send, for some reason you need 0.0003 BTC, even though that much is not consumed. |
|
|
|
what is the status with Poloniex? still alive?
Actually very close to listing XCP. Counterparty-savvy people, I have a question. When I attempt to send XCP from one address to another, it tells me there are insufficient Bitcoins at the source address. The thing is, the wallet that contains the source address has plenty of BTC, even if not enough were sent to that PARTICULAR address. Please tell me I don't have to send a tiny bit of BTC to every address I want to send XCP from. This makes a big difference. You need a small amount of BTC in that address, to pay the miner fees. Unfortunately, it is a limitation at this point. The developers or more technical members of the forum can provide further details. The wallet has BTC to pay whatever fees are needed... The only thing I can think of is that Counterparty sends BTC from a specific address to another, and uses the origin and destination of the BTC to determine the origin and destination of the XCP. I don't really see the need for that, but if that's how it works, I guess there isn't a way around it. Things just got more difficult for traders. |
|
|
|
what is the status with Poloniex? still alive?
Actually very close to listing XCP. Counterparty-savvy people, I have a question. When I attempt to send XCP from one address to another, it tells me there are insufficient Bitcoins at the source address. The thing is, the wallet that contains the source address has plenty of BTC, even if not enough were sent to that PARTICULAR address. Please tell me I don't have to send a tiny bit of BTC to every address I want to send XCP from. This makes a big difference. That's how the protocol works, you have to have enough BTC in the source address for XCP transactions. If I can send BTC from my wallet, why can't I send a Counterparty transaction? I thought the BTC was just needed to carry the message--why does it matter which address in the wallet has the BTC? Is there some need for proof of ownership of BTC? |
|
|
|
what is the status with Poloniex? still alive?
Actually very close to listing XCP. Counterparty-savvy people, I have a question. When I attempt to send XCP from one address to another, it tells me there are insufficient Bitcoins at the source address. The thing is, the wallet that contains the source address has plenty of BTC, even if not enough were sent to that PARTICULAR address. Please tell me I don't have to send a tiny bit of BTC to every address I want to send XCP from. This makes a big difference. |
|
|
|
Damn - 159.073 VTC = .77115 BTC just vanish after pressing the cancel button ( Was really beginning to like this site)
NO RESPONSE YET
Sorry about that! I've PM'd you. Just so every knows, the fastest way to get support is to email poloniex@gmail.com. The majority of support requests go there, so I check it a lot more often than I check bitcointalk. I'll update the first post with this info. Why are you ignoring me. Pls man, can i have a reply from u? I have emailed and pm u but still ignore were i can see u stil active on this forum by time. If ur website isnt finish u shouldnt let ppl register and make deposits. Just put it like UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Im very new to bitcoin and after read some i tho your site was legit. Please send the coin back if i cant acces my account jeeez No one has ever reported not being locked out of their account for any reason but a forgotten password. I'll find your email and send you a temporary password before I get to anyone else. I made one post relating to my efforts to get the new wallet server running (technical issue with Q2C), and I sometimes need to consult threads here for similar reasons. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry about the delay, guys. I have been getting the new wallet server up and running for the past... seven hours? There was a lot to work out, and I've been working as fast as I can to minimize the downtime. There was only about three or four hours where deposits and withdrawals were out. Everything is running smoothly now and a LOT faster.
The BTC block chain needed to be re-indexed, though, and that takes a while. Deposits and withdrawals were processed after the initial four hours, but they will be down for a while now until the re-indexing is done. This is BTC only--every other wallet is running fine. Also, you can still send deposits and request withdrawals, there will just be a delay in processing.
I'm now going to get to as many emails as I can before I need sleep.
|
|
|
|
|
I need to recompile the Q2C daemon for Poloniex, and I just can't get past this error:
net.cpp:1196:6: warning: character constant too long for its type [enabled by default]
net.cpp:1196:30: warning: character constant too long for its type [enabled by default]
net.cpp:1197:6: warning: character constant too long for its type [enabled by default]
net.cpp:1197:32: warning: character constant too long for its type [enabled by default]
net.cpp:1199:1: error: invalid conversion from ‘int’ to ‘const char*’ [-fpermissive]
net.cpp:1199:1: error: invalid conversion from ‘int’ to ‘const char*’ [-fpermissive]
net.cpp:1199:1: error: invalid conversion from ‘int’ to ‘const char*’ [-fpermissive]
net.cpp:1199:1: error: invalid conversion from ‘int’ to ‘const char*’ [-fpermissive]
make: *** [obj/net.o] Error 1
It looks like an actual error in the source, but that seems unlikely. Does anyone know what to do about this?
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, I've got the API set up, and can fetch everyone's balances. This will work just like NXT, with a little complication added by BTC fees.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
