Bug report

[PRab]

I just found this in 0.93.1. When I received a transaction, and brought up the advanced transaction info, it shows the wrong Transaction Inputs.


That same transaction on blockchain.info shows the correct inputs. https://blockchain.info/tx/20a62730bfa6d74baef15208e0a3456841eb9679c52b2b6b2ff4cc8eb35131c0?show_adv=true

This might be a dupe of https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919202.msg10372366#msg10372366, but that was a while ago.

[1713872068]

1713872068

[1713872068]

1713872068

[1713872068]

1713872068

[1713872068]

1713872068

[1713872068]

1713872068

[1713872068]

1713872068

[goatpig]

This is by design. If you want full tx traceability you'll have to use supernode.

[jl2012]

This is by design. If you want full tx traceability you'll have to use supernode.

Isn't it better just to mask the inputs table, rather than showing wrong data?

[PRab]

This is by design. If you want full tx traceability you'll have to use supernode.

If that is the design, then I would have expected to see "XXXXXX" for the sender. Right now I am just left questioning what is/who controls 3J98t1Wp...

[CircusPeanut]

Prab thanks for the bug report. I have noted it in our system. Right now Armory checks for a certain number of the types of inputs that we can report. if it's none of those, it converts the input script to a P2SH address and shows that next to "Non-Standard: "

For 0.94  we will make the logic for that display string more robust and eliminate all of the conditions that lead to an incorrect result. Then if it really doesn't fit any category that we check for we will display something like "Unknown" or "XXXXXXXXX".

[PRab]

Sounds good to me. Keep up the great work!

[zombieslayer9099]

But why exactly can Armory not track the sender, but it can track the other recipients? Can it not read the whole transaction correctly?

[goatpig]

Fullnode doesn't track all transaction hints anymore, only those relevant to your wallets. Those are only txouts that point to your addresses, or txins that spend such txouts.

When a txout funds one of your addresses, these coins have been redeemed from a previous txout (unless it's a coinbase reward) that are pointed at by hash and txout index in the supporting txin. Resolving that hash is what Fullnode doesn't do anymore.

To find a txout by its hash and index, you have to resolve the txhash to a block + transaction index. The hash itself does not carry any hints of which block and tx index this may be. It befalls on you to devise a solution to look these hashes up efficiently. The way Armory does it is through what we call the transaction hint database, aka the txhint DB.

The txhint DB uses the first 4 bytes of each transaction as keys, and the relevant block height + tx index as values. Several tx hashes may have the same leading 4 bytes, so you may find entries in the txhint DB where one key has several height|txindex values.

Prior to the new DB, Armory only offered one DB mode, bare node, which maintained txhints for all transactions seen in the blockchain. With the new DB format, fullnode doesn't do that anymore, since Supernode is meant to maintain that level of lookup functionality.

The issue you are seeing in the UI is the code trying to resolve the tx hashes pointed by txins and failing to do so. It then defaults to displaying the inputs as non standard. If you send coins to yourself, however, it will resolve the txhash and display the txin info properly.

Why is the full txhint DB gone from fullnode? It is a large and very fragmented DB, which makes HDDs crawl. It also makes no sense with the final state of fullnode which uses about 120MB of disk space, to support a 2-3GB txhint DB only to display sender data in one dialog (this is the only place in the GUI that currently needs pseudo arbitrary txhash lookup)

I had planned on adding a set of parallel threads that would resolve the sender hashes, but after discussing with etotheipi, we concluded that people who wants this level of data "granularity" would have to rely on supernode. The latest version of supernode is significantly faster than what's available right now with 0.93.x, so it won't carry such a high hardware requirements as before.

[zombieslayer9099]

By the latest version, you mean what has not been released yet?

[goatpig]

By the latest version, you mean what has not been released yet?

Yes