I would like to ask how to use more than one core installation at the same time. It looks the new version is portable so all the details are in the dir I wanted it in, no data somewhere on C:\. I know there was the -data-dir flag which seems to be still working though I'm not sure if that's what I search for. I do not want to interfere the different wallets with each other. I just want to save disc space by using the same files of the blockchain. -loadblock doesn't sound like that also, I do not want a copy of the blockchain, I want multiple wallets use the same blockchain storage files. How to do this?
You can't. Bitcoin Core does not support this yet, although Multiwallet functionality is in the works. Second question, I searched for an option but didn't found it. Core creates reserve addresses though they are invisible. When exporting the addresses I only can see the visible addresses. I want to do 2 things, make all reserve addresses visible so that I can export them
I don't think you can do this. You can export all of the addresses using the dumpwallet RPC command which will export all of the private keys to a text file wherever you specified. and secondly I want to raise the amount of reserve addresses. How can this be done?
Add keypool=<n> to your bitcoin.conf file where <n> is the number of keys you want to have in the keypool (aka reserve keys) at all times. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Client Software and Version Number: MultiBit Version 0.4.x & 0.5.x
Operating System: Windows 7 64-bit
System Hardware Specs: 4.0 GHz Quad Core CPU with 4 GB RAM and 50 GB free hard drive space.
Description of Problem: multibit is stuck synching.
Any Related Addresses: None
Any Related Transaction IDs: 84648a5725b9117067a2067fc848884b3bd189dad20ffa0348bc0387beb2175e
It looks like it didn't work.
Above is the information.
Now i'm lost i don't know what to do anymore,please help.
Shorena said READ that thread, NOT POST in that thread. Your transaction has a low fee. READ: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1802212.0 for info on what to do. (Note I said READ NOT POST YOUR QUESTION in that thread) |
|
|
|
at this time, I do not have access to my BTC. It is still showing as unconfirmed because of "low fee" but my balance is now zero. The BTC is somewhere in lalah land. Will the transaction fail and I will have access to my BTC again?
No. An unconfirmed transaction with a low fee can still confirm. The only way to guarantee that it won't confirm is to create a double spending transaction which confirms. To recover your Bitcoin while the transaction is unconfirmed (and only while it is unconfirmed), you need to somehow clear all of the unconfirmed transactions from your Electrum wallet and create a new transaction which sends the Bitcoin back to yourself. Only do that once you have run anti-malware software on your computer to clean out the malware that is causing the issue. |
|
|
|
The error is always thrown with bitcoin-cli signrawtransaction
Interesting. Try using your original signrawtransaction command but with "vout":0 instead of "vout":1createrawtransaction always generates a nice hash:
Createrawtransaction does not generate a hash. It creates a raw transaction. Just because something is displayed in hex does not mean that it s a hash. |
|
|
|
Thanks guys, but now I have this problem: error code: -3
error message:
Missing scriptPubKey
error code: -8
error message:
Invalid parameter, missing vout key
 For which command is each error being returned? |
|
|
|
I am having trouble figuring out how to use the json rpc php liberay without a username/password (witch is no longer required since 0.12).
The RPC username and password are still required. By default they are specified in the .cookie file in the Bitcoin datadir. This username and password will change every time you start Core. You can still set rpcuser and rpcpassword in the bitcoin.conf, but that is deprecated and may not be supported in the future. Alternatively you can use rpcauth. For rpcauth, see/use https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/share/rpcuser/rpcuser.py to generate the line you add to the bitcoin.conf. |
|
|
|
Will there be any way to limit the amount of storage required as time goes on? Will blocks always have to go all the way back to 2013, or could they in future be based on a more recent reference point?
You can enable pruning. Pruning means that Core will delete most of the blockchain once it has verified it. It does this on the fly so you won't have the whole thing stored on your disk. It does still require you to download the entire thing, but old blocks are deleted after they are verified and a certain number of newer blocks are found on top of it. With the default pruning setting, the disk space required is reduced to ~5 GB. Note that you will still be consuming the same amount of bandwidth and still wait as long for the blockchain to sync when pruning is enabled. It does not speed that up. To enable pruning, find the bitcoin.conf or make one in the Bitcoin Core data directory. Then add the following line to it: When you start Core again, it will prune the blockchain. I've never sold any Bitcoin. Presumably Core won't allow me to sell any until I've completely caught up on the 13 weeks I'm still behind. Is that correct?
Bitcoin Core does not have any functionality to sell Bitcoin. It allows you to send Bitcoin to other people. In order to send, you have to be fully synced. |
|
|
|
That is impossible to know. The transaction may or may not confirm, it is up to the miners. let's say that it won't get any confirmations. how long it will take until it will be canceled and everything will come back to normal?
First of all, transactions are not and cannot be canceled. Your wallet can choose to forget about it thus allowing you to respend the inputs, but that does not mean that every other node on the network will do so as well. IIRC blockchain.info will "forget" the transaction after 72 hours unless someone rebroadcasts it. also, the guy who received who has the full $210 amount, if he will send the amount back to me, will he have any risk to get his wallet on minus?
There is no such thing as a negative balance. If your wallet shows a negative balance, then it has a bug. The Bitcoin does not magically come from another input if the unconfirmed transaction it spends from is invalidated. His wallet will return to being as if it never received the Bitcoin in the first place. Also, please do not refer to your transactions by any fiat (e.g. USD) amount. The exchange rate constantly changes so it becomes difficult to know what transaction you are talking about. It is better if you give your transactions a label or just refer to it as the first couple characters of the transaction id. |
|
|
|
There seems to be much info on this around but three questions I cannot figure out
1. Do miners pick up a double spend if it is not using FSS RBF eg..
Some miners support FSS RBF, some support Full RBF, some support Opt-in RBF, and some don't support any form of RBF at all. Furthermore, your transaction has to propagate, so a lot of full nodes need to support whatever RBF you use, and that is also local node policy. RBF is part of local node policy so it all depends on the miner and there is no unified "miners support ..." for node policy. I use Electrum and have a unconfirmed transaction of over 24 hours is still unconfirmed. I can make a new wallet by reseeding in electrum and the unconfirmed will not show up as it builds actual transactions. - can I just now send the money with a higher fee to myself elsewhere and will the miners pick it up and negate the other ?
Opt-in RBF is the most supported form of RBF. Electrum has the option to enable Opt-in RBF in your transactions and to increase the fee of said transactions. AFAIK, Electrum does not have the ability to create any other RBF transaction (i.e. you can't force it by clearing all unconfirmed transactions). 2. If the above is untrue and I use FSS RBF, all the examples online show how to use coinb.in to replace a transaction that has one input and output. How do i do it when the original transaction combined 4 or 5 addresses to get the total to send?
"Combining address" just means having more than one input. Just make a transaction with more than one input. 3. If as another person pointed out if my input has to be fully spent and there is nothing left to add to the fee how exactly do I add more to the replacment transaciton (Do i just add another input ? if so could someone tell me how on coinb.in?)
Yes. You need to add another input. I would not use coinb.in for this for two reasons. First of all, AFAIK, coinb.in uses Bitcoin Core as their backend node (i.e. transactions are validated and sent via it) and Bitcoin Core does not support FSS or Full RBF. It only supports Opt-in RBF so you won't be able to make and send any RBF transactions without opting-in in the original transaction. Secondly, I have experienced issues with their signing code; it does not appear to actually sign transactions properly. |
|
|
|
|
Because those who know segwit well enough to implement it and change it do not like BU and thus do not know BU well enough to implement both Segwit and BU in a client. Nor do those people want to because they think that BU is a stupid idea.
Those who know BU well enough to implement it and change it do not like Segwit and thus do not know Segwit well enough to implement both BU and Segwit in a client. Nor do those people want to because they think that Segwit is a stupid idea.
|
|
|
|
Your transactions either had too low of a fee or were unconfirmed for too long so ViaBTC's node decided to kick those transactions out of its pool of unconfirmed transactions. This does not mean that everyone else did the same, and this most certainly does not mean that the transactions have confirmed, nor does it mean that they will never confirm. Whichever transaction confirms first is the "right" one. It seems that whoever sent you the Bitcoin is either scamming you, or their wallet is broken. edit 3:
i had $0 balance before receiving all 5 payments.
right now 4 of them got confirmed and seems like one of them was marked as double spend
the problem is that i sent as one single payment my entire balance including the payment which was marked as duble spend and right now that single payment is still processing with 0 confirmations.
what will happen now?
If your transaction of the double spending pair confirms, then your Bitcoin is fine and eventually your spending transaction should confirm. If the other double spend confirms, then your transaction will be invalid and the Bitcoin (minus the ones from the double spend) will "return" to you. Basically there are two outcomes, either the transactions confirm and the receiver receives the Bitcoin, or they do not and your wallet reverts to a state where you did not send the Bitcoin and did not receive the Bitcoin from the double spending transaction. |
|
|
|
|
Nearly all cloud mining services are scams. If you participate in cloud mining, there is a very high likelihood that you will be scammed.
|
|
|
|
Wow, this looks promising man. Thanks for sharing this to us. We all know that more and more people are suffering with the long confirmation time of their bitcoin transfer. This would greatly help them in various ways. Will I be able to use it now? Do I just need to download the file that you provided above and just follow the steps?
Yes. You will need to have Java installed, but the download should work immediately. There are a few bugs and weirdness with the program. I have not had the time to update it or fix issues. |
|
|
|
You said, "It simply means that your second set of transactions spend from the same inputs as the first set of transactions. Because both spend from the same inputs, the transactions conflict and are thus double spends."
I have almost the same problem as this. Has it something to do on the amount of the latest total BTC inputs againts the amount of BTC that was/were sent from it? See for example the sender received two txns (i.e., 0.1595358 BTC and another 0.11344768 BTC and all were Confirmed) totaled 0.27298348 BTC, then he sent 0.26 BTC to other person's wallet..
And with some glitch (like maybe of his wallet provider slow relay of txns or delayed broadcast), with him unknowingly, he still sees enough balance in his wallet (previous output not being updated) so he made a second txn and sent to me 0.198 BTC..
After few days, his balance went to negative and both of his outgoing txns were flgged as "Double Spend"..
The 0.198 BTC which i supposed to received is still Unconfirmed and was flagged as "Double Spend", much the same with other receiver's 0.26 BTC
So may I ask, has it something to do with the outstanding balance of the sender's BTC wallet against the amount of the BTC sent?
I don't know. The problem with the sender's wallet. His wallet software is simply buggy and broken (and is probably blockchain.info). |
|
|
|
Then I create the raw transaction: bitcoin-cli createrawtransaction '[{"txid":"0d53507afc671e57841e3f72cee5db1324da4fa0c42a50c98872b820d2a2c768","vout":1,"scriptPubKey":"76a9141e460f008264743caa92c9d23f944216fd29c7a788ac"}]' '{"1EhPUwR9BkWWJ1K9rWjxSFbBMGKXKozCim":0.00038,"15sGXSMk99DUzwPMXqCevYB1gmS3c62CQr":0.00007}'
There is no need to specify the scriptPubKey in this command. It is not used for creating raw unsigned transactions and is not even a parameter of createrawtransaction. Ok, now I want to sign the transaction. I format the command as prescribed:
687_2$ bitcoin-cli signrawtransaction '010000000168c7a2d220b87288c9502ac4a04fda2413dbe5ce723f1e84571e67fc7a50530d0100000000ffffffff0270940000000000001976a914963d0a59d3b0ccfd0df3c95c972bee98e06ba19688ac581b0000000000001976a914356242ba76e9e8df980ac9d2d5399dee1233e45488ac00000000' '[{"txid":"0d53507afc671e57841e3f72cee5db1324da4fa0c42a50c98872b820d2a2c768","vout":1,"scriptPubKey":"76a9141e460f008264743caa92c9d23f944216fd29c7a788ac"}]'
Since the transaction you are spending from is in your wallet, there is no need to specify the prevouts. Just run the command with only the raw unsigned transaction from createrawtransaction and the wallet will handle the rest. |
|
|
|
OK, OK, don't yell at me. I know this topic is really old. But I was hoping someone here will be able to give me some help. I tried to implement my own miner (just to understand mining). I implemented it using getwork (I know it's old, but it was simpler for me) so to check that it works I used the same example as here: {"hash1"=>"00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010000", "target"=>"ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff00000000", "submitold"=>true, "identifier"=>"91138", "data"=>"00000002fc517a2df2b283474b135215a00604af276318262f5eebc00000043100000000db9fcfcc3781c1342c2750214e46407286cbf29985e688d0392e6b8005c4c8245032580a1a07a85e00000000000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000", "midstate"=>"03ad4305c1cad2bf14a99b82f3557b5722a060d6ac207450e939cb9f8143a605"}
Or in a more human-readable format the essence of this is the data and the target: Data:
00000002 fc517a2df2b283474b135215a00604af276318262f5eebc00000043100000000 db9fcfcc3781c1342c2750214e46407286cbf29985e688d0392e6b8005c4c824 5032580a 1a07a85e 00000000 000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000
Target:
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff00000000
We also know that the right solution is: (nonce = 0x8e631c12) Solution:
00000002 fc517a2df2b283474b135215a00604af276318262f5eebc00000043100000000 db9fcfcc3781c1342c2750214e46407286cbf29985e688d0392e6b8005c4c824 5032580a 1a07a85e [b]8e631c12[/b]
000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000
The Nounce that I get is: 0x000141D0 And the hash of the binary data that I get is: "0000075B2D7B45479BDE7D0A073900AE825F69C9FF16084CF83BB45B4F7B63C9" Target to compare with: "00000000ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff" Result: BAD NEWS: the calculated nounce is different and the hash is greater than the target  Where's the mistake? Or: where are the mistakes?  What block are you trying to replicate? Check your endianess, almost everything in Bitcoin is little endian so you might have some errors there. |
|
|
|
Your first two transactions have a low transaction fee. Your third transaction spends from the first two, so it cannot confirm until your first two transactions do. Your fourth transaction spends from the third transaction, so that cannot confirm until the third one does as well. Read https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1802212.0 for information what you can do about this to speed up your transactions. Right now your only options are to wait or ask miners for help. |
|
|
|
|
Your transaction has already confirmed.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
