62
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: lock and vout
|
on: August 03, 2015, 08:05:08 AM
|
I'll look into it, still if I want to lock the whole transaction it seems very unnecessary to have to decode stuff and loop through everything...
Edit: Ok thx, decoderawtransaction works, but holy moly thats alot of work...
Can one transaction create multiple outputs that you own? How does that even work!?
---
Followup Q:
So I simply look at the scriptPubKey.addresses to see if the destination address is in there then add that to vout in lockunspent?
|
|
|
63
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: lock and vout
|
on: August 03, 2015, 07:58:09 AM
|
Basically how can I extract the info I need to provide to lockunspent?
I can't see vout on any of my transactions... Having to code something that is only there sometimes is really bad.
listTransactions
then
getTransaction
do I need to getrawtransaction to se UTXO?
So then I need to set the -txindex flag?
|
|
|
64
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: lock and vout
|
on: August 03, 2015, 07:52:56 AM
|
Ok, I get that it's important but if I just want to lock a complete transaction I shouldn't have to supply it? Specially when I don't know how to retrieve it, seems it's only present in transactions that have multiple outputs?
But what does the number refer to? The pointer in an array for each transaction? I have googled and that number is sometimes 1222 or something large like that; does that mean there are 1222 output minimum in that transaction? Just trying to wrap my head around this hidden complexity.
Basically how can I extract the info I need to provide to lockunspent?
|
|
|
65
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / lock and vout
|
on: August 03, 2015, 07:46:23 AM
|
Does lockunspent require vout?
Do all transactions have vout?
How can I see vout?
Is 0 the default vout?
What is vout?
In the documentation is says: (numeric) The output number -- eh, ok?
|
|
|
66
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Distributed bitcoind
|
on: August 02, 2015, 12:04:58 PM
|
Sure, I'm just going to digest the huge change I need to make in my infrastructure to switch to the latest bitcoind. Involves new machines, moving wallets and all that jazz. Urgh.
I hope this works with notify. We'll see.
Edit: You wouldn't happen to know why the static builds of bitcoind got dropped?
|
|
|
68
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Distributed bitcoind
|
on: August 02, 2015, 11:21:38 AM
|
Is there some way to track unspent and notify transactions + confirmations on a public address without private key in a secure way preferably in bitcoind?
With raw transactions I can store the private keys outside of the wallet but I still need unspent tracking to be able to create the raw transaction and notifications both on transaction propagation and confirms in order for the raw API to make any sense.
Are those planned?
Edit: it seems to me the "wallet" should only contain the private keys, and some other databases (call them track and notify) should store that data.
|
|
|
69
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Distibuted bitcoind
|
on: July 16, 2015, 09:33:40 AM
|
Can you today use bitcoind with the private keys outside of the wallet without development complexity?
The only way to assure 100% uptime is to distribute your cluster and for that you need to handle private key distribution outside of the closed wallet.dat file.
What would the way to do this with the raw transactions API look like?
|
|
|
72
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Last official release with static build
|
on: July 07, 2015, 07:36:31 PM
|
I think it's when the dependencies (glibc etc.) are compiled into the binary so you can run newer software on older operatives without needing to reinstall linux once it goes out of support. Some people argue that having an old installation is a security risk, but seen bugs like heart bleed and such I think the gamble is actually even.
|
|
|
76
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Memory
|
on: June 26, 2015, 10:21:10 PM
|
I still run the heart bleed version.
When linux starts shooting processes in the head that usually means actual usable memory is missing.
All other questions can be answered conservatively.
I don't think I have ever seen a bitcoind without memory leaks, which is really concerning since it powers a 3 billion economy; but let's focus on the cute image so we can feel a little bit better.
|
|
|
77
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Memory
|
on: June 25, 2015, 06:12:52 PM
|
My fullnode was killing processes left and right for the past week until I noticed bitcoind was gobbing all 4GB... uptime was maybe 6 months. For SSD setup's with no swap; what can be done to sustain bitcoind longer in terms of memory usage?
|
|
|
78
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Compile bitcoind/bfgminer on Raspberry Pi
|
on: June 11, 2015, 10:38:42 PM
|
I'm just adding tutorials on how to build stuff for the RPi here:
Here's BFGMiner for ASICMiner/BFL:
> sudo apt-get install autoconf libtool libncurses-dev yasm curl libcurl4-openssl-dev pkg-config git libjansson-dev uthash-dev > git clone git://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer.git bfgminer > cd bfgminer > ./autogen.sh > ./configure > make
> ./bfgminer -o stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 -O user:pass -S icarus:/dev/ttyUSB0
I'm going to try and run both my SC 60GH on one RPi, will be interesting to see if it works!
Sorry about the necro and bit offtopic, but my win7 machine suddenly can't mine with the Monarches any more, but my RPi 2 with this works fine! 100% dunno why, the win machine spouts: [2015-06-11 19:34:43] BFL 0aa: Failed to send queue [2015-06-11 19:34:43] BFL 0aa: Received unexpected queue result response: [2015-06-11 19:34:43] BFL 0aa: Error: Get temp returned empty string/timed out
|
|
|
|