ok well i tested it, still the same issue with the blkindex.dat file, so will continue using 2.1.3 for now. Can't reproduce it.. this should only happen when you move from 2.1.2 to 2.1.3+, not when you move from 2.1.3 to 2.1.3.1 because as I mentioned in 2.1.3 release notes: Note: this release contains breaking changes to how block index is stored. You will HAVE TO resync blockchain from scratch either directly from network or by using bootstrap.dat (could take few hours). Make a copy of your current data folder in case if you decide to switch back. It is happening though man, not trying to be a pain, but im using 2.1.3 at the moment and when I try to open 2.1.3.1 it tells me it has an error with the blkindex.dat file. well.. I have no idea why then tbh - I launched 2.1.2, synced a bit, launched 2.1.3 - got error, deleted blkindex.dat and launched 2.1.3 again, synced a bit again, launched 2.1.3.1 and it went fine with no errors at all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Could you upload your blkindex.dat somewhere (prev link is expired now)? I'll attempt it, but could take forever for it to upload as it is like 682mb and my net is really slow lol lol mine too. let's just wait and see if anyone else have this problem. |
|
|
|
ok well i tested it, still the same issue with the blkindex.dat file, so will continue using 2.1.3 for now. Can't reproduce it.. this should only happen when you move from 2.1.2 to 2.1.3+, not when you move from 2.1.3 to 2.1.3.1 because as I mentioned in 2.1.3 release notes: Note: this release contains breaking changes to how block index is stored. You will HAVE TO resync blockchain from scratch either directly from network or by using bootstrap.dat (could take few hours). Make a copy of your current data folder in case if you decide to switch back. It is happening though man, not trying to be a pain, but im using 2.1.3 at the moment and when I try to open 2.1.3.1 it tells me it has an error with the blkindex.dat file. well.. I have no idea why then tbh - I launched 2.1.2, synced a bit, launched 2.1.3 - got error, deleted blkindex.dat and launched 2.1.3 again, synced a bit again, launched 2.1.3.1 and it went fine with no errors at all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Could you upload your blkindex.dat somewhere (prev link is expired now)? |
|
|
|
ok well i tested it, still the same issue with the blkindex.dat file, so will continue using 2.1.3 for now. Can't reproduce it.. this should only happen when you move from 2.1.2 to 2.1.3+, not when you move from 2.1.3 to 2.1.3.1 because as I mentioned in 2.1.3 release notes: Note: this release contains breaking changes to how block index is stored. You will HAVE TO resync blockchain from scratch either directly from network or by using bootstrap.dat (could take few hours). Make a copy of your current data folder in case if you decide to switch back. |
|
|
|
having a slight issue with this version on windows man.  err... sec, I'll try to fix and recompile Wait a sec on that, I got it to run by downloading and extracting the dll file to the folder, but you should actually seriously work on getting it to accept the blkindex.dat file that is currently there for the previous version... this could be a major turn off for all users having to redownload it each time there is an update.  Anyway for people wanting to download the blockchain again after installing for now, just download this and extract it to the folder with the 2.1.3.1 exe: http://download.dll-files.com/c81c2063954800835adc179294cea84f/libgcc_s_dw2-1.zip?0XHlXIcDlRPlease Note: This is just a suggestion, 2.1.3.0 still works just fine for now and can be used still until 2.1.3.1 is functioning properly. Recompiled and reuploaded https://github.com/UdjinM6/Coin2.1/releases/tag/v2.1.3.1This one should work  If not - i'll try to fix it later, have to run now... |
|
|
|
having a slight issue with this version on windows man. err... sec, I'll try to fix and recompile |
|
|
|
re 15 minutes: hmmm.. have you tried the version I mentioned or do you still use some of the previous versions?
re compressing: if by "compressing" you mean "skipping blocks" then no, wallet needs them all to rebuild chain on its own. You can however try to zip datadir (without wallet, logs and config files) and provide that to skip initial reindexing but I'm not 100% sure if that would actually work when you move it from one system to another.
The version I am using is the last one you worked on I believe, the one that was created around the time the blockchain got stuck. Well, I can already hardly remember what it was and even when that happened  But I believe it was "2.1.2 critical bugfix". Check version number in Help -> Debug window, mine says v2.1.3.0 |
|
|
|
....
Actually using my recommendations (grab latest release and move your wallet every 10K transactions to a new one) solves problem more or less for current users.
...
So it's ~1 minute to start GUI on my old 2010 mac which I think is fine comparing to other POS coins.
...
... Currently though it takes almost 15 minutes for mine to open, not sure if it has something to do with the amount of coins stored in it or what. ... I'm also glad you explained this out, I have no idea how the wallet actually works beyond its GUI interface. So compressing downloaded block data that could still be readable by the wallet is out too then? re 15 minutes: hmmm.. have you tried the version I mentioned or do you still use some of the previous versions? re compressing: if by "compressing" you mean "skipping blocks" then no, wallet needs them all to rebuild chain on its own. You can however try to zip datadir (without wallet, logs and config files) and provide that to skip initial reindexing but I'm not 100% sure if that would actually work when you move it from one system to another. |
|
|
|
Coin2 wallet is based on a quite old POS software. POS wallet's in general have waaaay more transactions (10Ks and more) because of staking and bitcoin data structures just was not designed for that so POS wallets are usually reeeally slow if you are staking (and you have to to secure network). Next problem is low block time - you have a huge data of 1GB+ which is mostly useless because of empty blocks (most of them have only coinbase tx which is generating new coins) but you need to scan through it almost all the time. And finally wallet devs don't fork it properly so it's really hard to keep it up to date with some bitcoin improvements in that field - it simply zillion hours of work to do. Another problem for Coin2 and alike is that to protect coin from bashing by bitcoiners it uses scrypt instead of sha256 which is waaay slower (it was designed to be so) and block verification takes a lot more resources. I tried to analyze the most critical performance parts back in 2015 and made some changes, see https://github.com/UdjinM6/Coin2.1/releases - it has both mac and windows binaries. But that's basically it. I can't do anything with block time or hash algo without hardfork. And even if we forked it won't give too much benefits because history is already there and you can't just throw it away, you'll have to verify it once you install new wallet somewhere. If you want a fast working wallet you need to reconsider a lot starting from blockchain properties and ending with what wallet to fork from for a new blockchain. Well this should be something that if it is needed the community should vote on, I agree with most that it takes forever to open the wallet, but it does work. Maybe a different route could work, an algorithm to compress old block data but something that the wallet could read still.. not sure. I haven't really messed with actual code for almost 9 years, and even then it was just plain old C Language, kinda not sure what all better functions C++ has to offer, I just know they are similar. Or an updated wallet(for users only) that grabs the latest transaction, goes back about 100k blocks and loads the data from there. Keeping the main wallet for the block explorer and anything else that needs the complete chain history. Actually using my recommendations (grab latest release and move your wallet every 10K transactions to a new one) solves problem more or less for current users. Here's a little test: 03/24/16 19:34:34 Coin2.1 version v2.1.3.0 (2015-10-28 10:05:11 +0300) <---- start
....
03/24/16 19:35:21 Loading index, loaded 960000 blocks
03/24/16 19:35:28 LoadBlockIndex(): hashBestChain=e6fd97de55d6e3ff6405 height=964277 trust=2099217867472243 date=03/18/16 18:45:26
03/24/16 19:35:28 LoadBlockIndex(): synchronized checkpoint 000005510a96f9c91fc4767e9fbb0c295abca7ff25d8dd286b3dba3a5975f374 <---- all blocks loaded
....
03/24/16 19:35:35 Done loading <----GUI appeared So it's ~1 minute to start GUI on my old 2010 mac which I think is fine comparing to other POS coins. As for "goes back about 100k blocks and loads the data from there" - this means you have no block chain anymore which makes everything else useless - it brakes most of the data structures, logic etc.. and you won't be able to stake of course. Even if it was smth like pruning which was implemented in Bitcoin Core recently you still would need to download every block to build utxo db. What you just described is closer to a kind of SPV wallet and in this case I think it should be easier to find some implementations of SPV for other coins rather than trying to fit this model into current one (i.e. like you described - current one is for services/staking, SPV - for "normal" users who just want to have ability to send/receive coins). And then maybe find someone who is ok with the code for SPV.  But again, if "normal" user will open wallet sometimes to keep blocks up to date - wallet slowness shouldn't be a problem for him. |
|
|
|
Coin2 wallet is based on a quite old POS software. POS wallet's in general have waaaay more transactions (10Ks and more) because of staking and bitcoin data structures just was not designed for that so POS wallets are usually reeeally slow if you are staking (and you have to to secure network). Next problem is low block time - you have a huge data of 1GB+ which is mostly useless because of empty blocks (most of them have only coinbase tx which is generating new coins) but you need to scan through it almost all the time. And finally wallet devs don't fork it properly so it's really hard to keep it up to date with some bitcoin improvements in that field - it simply zillion hours of work to do. Another problem for Coin2 and alike is that to protect coin from bashing by bitcoiners it uses scrypt instead of sha256 which is waaay slower (it was designed to be so) and block verification takes a lot more resources. I tried to analyze the most critical performance parts back in 2015 and made some changes, see https://github.com/UdjinM6/Coin2.1/releases - it has both mac and windows binaries. But that's basically it. I can't do anything with block time or hash algo without hardfork. And even if we forked it won't give too much benefits because history is already there and you can't just throw it away, you'll have to verify it once you install new wallet somewhere. If you want a fast working wallet you need to reconsider a lot starting from blockchain properties and ending with what wallet to fork from for a new blockchain. |
|
|
|
... never mind, i just remembered the Dash Debit Card budget proposal has a later start date, its not scheduled for next super-block (448632) but for the super-block in june 2016 (481864) ref : https://dashninja.pl/budgets.htmledit : maybe the Dash Budget Proposal Vote Tracker ( http://dashvotetracker.com/) could include the start and end date of budget proposals as well ? Yep, nothing wrong here, it's just how http://dashvotetracker.com/ shows proposals. ...
dash-debit-card
* Will not be paid with next budget. This proposal exceeds the remaining unallocated budget of 949 DASH!
...
I wonder where did you get this red one from? dashwhale --> https://www.dashwhale.org/budgetmakes it a bit confusing Ahh, I see, I was searching through code - thought it was from our rpc  This needs fixing on dashwhale side then  |
|
|
|
... never mind, i just remembered the Dash Debit Card budget proposal has a later start date, its not scheduled for next super-block (448632) but for the super-block in june 2016 (481864) ref : https://dashninja.pl/budgets.htmledit : maybe the Dash Budget Proposal Vote Tracker ( http://dashvotetracker.com/) could include the start and end date of budget proposals as well ? Yep, nothing wrong here, it's just how http://dashvotetracker.com/ shows proposals. ...
dash-debit-card
* Will not be paid with next budget. This proposal exceeds the remaining unallocated budget of 949 DASH!
...
I wonder where did you get this red one from? |
|
|
|
Dear everyone..
Can import wallet form paper wallet to Dash wallet electrum?
All wallet electrum, i try can't this.. why?
Founder of electrum maybe can rebuild this software..
thanks..
File -> New/Restore, Choose "Restore a wallet or import keys" And then just follow screens. coincidence  does this makes sense ?? https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Sweep+a+Paper+WalletHmm... I don't have "Wallet > Private Keys > Import" in Electrum-Dash, only "Wallet > Private Keys > Sweep" which is not the same - "sweep" sends your funds to some electrum (seed generated) address. This might be even better option actually because it can be recovered later, it just depends on what do you really want - to import this exact privkey or just get the funds out of paper wallet. |
|
|
|
Dear everyone..
Can import wallet form paper wallet to Dash wallet electrum?
All wallet electrum, i try can't this.. why?
Founder of electrum maybe can rebuild this software..
thanks..
File -> New/Restore, Choose "Restore a wallet or import keys"  And then just follow screens. |
|
|
|
 let the guessing begin I'm thinking number 17 is actually from a base on the moon, so if someone could change it to "Secret Moonbase" that would be nice. Edit : i just had a thought, what if its not a country but an organisation thats running those 9 masternodes ? whats if .... its... the NSA  Sorry to disappoint you but I guess it's written right there Note that IPv6 nodes cannot be located! |
|
|
|
Voted for Bitcoin because: 1. I wasn't there when Satoshi started mining and now he has a lot of coins while I have almost nothing comparing to him 2. It had no cool features at its start, only the basics, and gui was ugly too btw 3. There were not so many places where I could spend bitcoins back then So, it's obviously a scam |
|
|
|
IndependAnt? |
|
|
|
.....
.....
....
Do you understand that wallet software and even user education, are part of the system?
If you take the broader view, how about taking an even broader view: Do you understand that trial and error represent a lesson in user education? Every user at some point will have a moment where his tx takes a long time because he forgot to pay fees, clicked the "send as zero fee if possible" etc etc. That's the moment when he learned why fees are useful. That's part of his learning. Now... if that happened once and he thought it won't happen because now he paid 0.0001 / KB, which is 0.01$ for a 250byte tx, then he has something more to learn: It's not only about paying the fee, but how much you pay. So, taking this even broader view, your client may have learned yet another lesson into how to properly use bitcoin. So the ecosystem improved by improving user education / giving him lessons the hard way. It's like forgetting your money in your pocket and putting your pants in the washing machine - destroying the paper notes. I'm not going to blame the destructible nature of paper money for that one but I will sure make a mental note to check my pockets in the future, before throwing the pants in the washing machine. Lessons everywhere ... Well, I have to support smooth in this... Imo there is a very small amount of users who would like to learn by trial and errors. Most of users want everything right here right now and "in one click' or otherwise - "it's broken, nothing to see here, let's move on to another option". There is no way my mom could go somewhere to figure out what size of a fee is recommended right now, is there any attack on network or smth like that. She would be like "err, what???"  Just no way. There should be only simple steps: 1) Select who to pay (hopefully by name via address book or smth), 2) enter amount, 3) click send (and confirm a fee if it's ok). That's it. Or else - "paypal always worked well for me..." and you might never see that user again  With this in mind - there is a lot to improve. EDIT: PS. But since we are still not that far away from "sending emails via cmd line" in the crypto currency history it's not a big deal for current users who are mostly geeks. Future users still have to wait for "an iPhone" in crypto to "send their emails". |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
