So that my first transaction will be confirmed at the same time with the second transaction. -snip-
Yes, the parent and child must be included is the same block if the child has higher fee than the parent. Since the child has a high fee but can't be mined without the parent, miners will take the parent in consideration when prioritizing the transaction(s). Miners will compute the total fee-rate based from the total paid fee and size of the parent & children. Worth reading: Wiki: Miner fees - CPFP
|
|
|
That will only show if "Advanced preview" in the preferences is on or he clicked "advanced" in the 'simple preview' after clicking "send". Is this different in 2FA wallets? Edit: Maybe this is different because I am using a watch only wallet and therefore the transaction cannot be sent Yes, it will show when your wallet is watch-only or for 2FA wallets when you click 'cancel' in the 2FA code window instead of 'ok'. It's pretty easy to reproduce it since it'll only take a minute to create test wallets. Maybe because they want to make it as simple as possible for non-advanced users.
|
|
|
I don't run an antivirus though. I'm pretty sure there's an issue with cpu thread selections on some CPUs and that's what I'm encountering atm.
Run it using a different command, like vanitysearch -o output.txt 1a. If it consumes all of your CPU resource, then it's not " that issue". I think the problem is the way you want to use vanitysearch, it's not meant for creating bulk random addresses IMO. I'm pretty sure that there are other tools that can do that bulk address generation better ( I don't have one however). Why don't VanitySearch1.18 and VanitySearch1.19 versions work for me, reports the error GPUEngine: Launch: an illegal memory access was encountered, and VanitySearch1.17 version works correctly?
You have the same issue as this guy: Issue #70And one of v1.18's release note was " Updated to CUDAv11", maybe it has something to do with your drivers.
|
|
|
There's a thread here that contains most of the info you need to setup Lightning in Electrum: Electrum Lightning Network walkthrough by BitCryptex. Read it carefully before trying to open a channel. If anything, you can also read the previous post and see if a problem that you'll likely encounter was already solved. The UI of mobile and desktop are totally different but you just need to find the right buttons, they are named in a similar way.
|
|
|
-snip-
-snip-I can indeed see that I have 19 transactions with prepaid 2fa but, that still does not negate the fact that the electrum UI failed to disclose this fee to me on the get go. The Disclaimer when choosing " wallet with 2-factor authentication" may be a little bit vague about the fee ( not to mention the small font): ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FiVLednG.png&t=665&c=Xkzh_21I6zEOsg) But as you can see, it's disclosed there. There's also an info about preferences ( underlined) about how'd you want to pay for the 2FA service, but it didn't specified where to find it ( lower-right 'blue shield' icon). Even so, Electrum will still display the entire transaction before you broadcast it, which will include the output for TrustedCoin's fee.
That will only show if " Advanced preview" in the preferences is on or he clicked " advanced" in the 'simple preview' after clicking " send". And it's disabled by default. The simple preview only consist of fee rate slider, 'send', 'cancel' & 'advance' button; after that, the 2FA code text box and an 'Ok' & 'Cancel' button.
|
|
|
Okay, I've ran some tests and noticed that: My antivirus is acting up whenever I'm using vanitysearch, it's not detecting anything but consuming a lot of resources. Much higher than what Vanitysearch is using; so I've included it to my AV's " exceptions list". And it worked! What's the best way of maximizing the generation speed ? Is there any good config out there?
Somehow, vanitysearch isn't using all of the cores or even processing power when using that command, there should be something wrong. Whatever the reason is, I've tried to use 1 thread and it resulted with a slightly slower rate ( just about -10%). So, try to run 3-4 instances of Vanitysearch running with the same command but pointing to different output files. Creating batch files is a good shortcut to do this, eg.: instance1.bat vanitysearch -t 1 -o output1.txt 1* instance2.bat vanitysearch -t 1 -o output2.txt 1* instance3.bat vanitysearch -t 1 -o output3.txt 1* ...And so forth Each instance will be slower than a solo instance but overall number of generated addresses and keys could be higher.
|
|
|
Won't solve the issue.
Don't know but your previous speed doesn't sound right for an old i3 CPU from 2012 ( third-gen maybe) when searching for '1*'. You'll likely get 1000-2000 per update of " Found" at best ( based from my PC w/ i3-4130 procie). Other than the additional -c which is unnecessary for a wildcard prefix, I can't find any issues with the command you're using. If you previously used an older version with faster result, then downgrade to that. The weird thing is, your processor can search for Million keys per second, while it can only " no-prefix-search" random address & key pair @ thousands per second. Perhaps it's not meant for that use-case.
|
|
|
And what kind of garbage is this today on the 24th, Electrum 4.0.2 is constantly synchronized at the entrance to the program and cannot finish it: at the bottom, the numbers are constantly updated and the circle is green or red, then the arrows are synchronized with the network
Mine has no problem with synchronization. Seems like you've been being disconnected from your selected server again and again, try to connect to other servers. If you're using your own and it's outdated, upgrade to the latest version ( probably related: Electrum 4.0.2 keeps Synchronizing) BTW, that was off-topic... and the number below that's being updated is the total number of addresses in your wallet + new UTXOs.
|
|
|
This is the transaction info I got. I read it maybe due to me having 2fa enabled, is that true?
The extra output is indeed looks like TrustedCoin's fee. To confirm that it was, double-click on the transaction in the history ( on the date) and check the outputs. Some should be highlighted with color, the green/yellow ones are yours, blue is the 2FA fee. That payment is for that tx your next 19 txs. Trusted coin - Electrum help page: https://api.trustedcoin.com/#/electrum-help
|
|
|
-snip- start %USERPROFILE%\Desktop\VanitySearch.exe -c -o output.txt 1*
Why is it only doing 600 adresses /sec instead of 21000 per /sec as it used?
If it's not a hardware issue, my guess is: Vanityseach might be struggling to write on that output file due to its current size. Have you been using the same 'output.txt' file since the start? If yes, try to use a new text file like " -o output2.txt" and see if it will speed-up.
|
|
|
It seems that I'm not connected to localhost:2333, how can I verify or just know what is my RPC?
Is your node running? If no, you need to run it together with the mining software. What are you using, the GUI or CLI? If it's the GUI, you might need to add server=1 to your config file to enable RPC outside of the GUI's console. ( that's based from Bitcoin Core's behavior)
|
|
|
If the node is in the same machine as the miner and the sample above doesn't work, try to use localhost and the port ( your blockchain's), as the 'mining server'. --url=http://localhost:port
|
|
|
And if both wallets are behind NAT?
I don't know if it will work in the first place since I haven't successfully opened a channel between two Electrum wallets yet and AFAIK there's no related article/documentation to point you at. So I can't walk you through that particular issue, sry. For now, try to use the remapped address instead of your ISP's.
|
|
|
-snip-
Ok so I found the transaction as a "P2SH-P2PK" change address. But I guess I need to find what private key that is and add the prefix "P2SH-P2PK:privatkey", but how will I know which private key it is? Do you know that HCP? In other case I can create a new wallet and import the private key one by one and see which one that hasn't any transaction and add the prefix to it? Edit: Tried to take one private key that didn't have any transaction when importing it and add the prefix "P2SH-P2PK:" but the "next" button wasn't enabled... The " Key List" export should have the address together with its private key... but if you didn't saved them, just get them individually from Armory. View HCP's post's 2nd image, the " Wallet Properties", from there expand where the address belongs and double-click the address; Click " View Address Keys" to get its private key. To import it to Electrum, use p2wpkh-p2sh: as written in the 'info'.
|
|
|
Edit: Finally I found I solution. When I exported the addresses (not the private keys), did I get all of the transactions. Anyone got an answer for this? ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Electrum will import the legacy address ( P2PKH) derived from the private key by default. If some of those addresses aren't legacy, you'll have to add a prefix when importing the keys to Electrum. Using this format ( will show when you click 'info'): ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXA2P081.png&t=665&c=d89xsbp8v-0RUA) In electrum I can only see the first one and the size is the outputs not the amount in btc that I did send, is it possible to change that as well?
-snip- So my output will be 3.5 btc and my change will be 2,5 btc. The transaction amount in armory is 1 btc, but in electrum it is 3.5 btc.
Probably because Armory is seeing the other output as change because it belongs to the wallet. Electrum doesn't because the change address wasn't imported in that imported wallet.
|
|
|
Most incoming transactions have been smaller ones from my mining pool. -snip-
If there's an option to increase the " auto-withdrawal amount" in that pool, tweak it to at least 0.0001-0.001BTC ( or higher) per withdrawal. AFAIK most pool have that option. That way, each UTXO will have enough balance for a " normal transaction".
|
|
|
The issue was reported by someone months ago but the devs never replied: Issue: 6370For CoinGecko's API's response to history rates, it seems to be working when I test it, other sources won't work for Electrum either. So, the " source" might not be the culprit. There's nothing else you can do but to wait for the developers to respond to the issue.
|
|
|
-snip-
I will always have sufficient incoming capacity, since all clients will open channels to me with sufficient local capacity, for me it will be just incoming if there is no routing of the passing nodes, which I am going to do - do not use routing nodes between us Okay, so that's the issue in the " Lightning Network Walktrough" thread is all about. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to open channels between two Electrum wallets either. I have tried adding the " IP Address" but it always results with " Timeout" or " Cancelled Error". You can try it: instead of using just the nodeid, follow it with an '@' sign then the PC/ISP's IP address like for example: 0369c4ddc6076646ddf30ad58c4beca8eee399557063f69a17xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@17x.1xx.2x.4xBoth Electrum wallets should be active.
|
|
|
"I suggest custodian wallets for amounts like 0.00069376 a year." Can I tell you more about this? what did you mean?
For example, my clients will transfer me let's say 60 rubles a month in total, this is 0.00005788 for a year this is 0.00069376
Because, you'll have to pay a fee that might take a portion of it to spend that balance because you'll end up with lots of very small inputs. Transaction fee will be based from the fee rate ( which you'll set in the wallet) and the transaction's virtual size which will get higher if it has a lot of inputs. 1sat/B is still good enough to consolidate them though. Custodial wallets will just send from their hot wallet when you want to withdraw ( minus their fee which can be cheaper for low-priority). Personally, I'll use a custodial wallet for that amount. LN is a very good choice however won't let you receive 'savings' from your 'clients' unless you have enough inbound capacity. And you don't have enough funds to open a channel of 0.002 BTC then use submarine swap or spend some satoshi. You need to find a way to increase your inbound capacity like mentioned in the previous sentence. I mean that now I transfer over the real network first from a multisig wallet to two already existing LN. In the test network, how do I do that?
I don't get it. But everything you can do with mainnet, you can do the same with testnet.
|
|
|
|