MIA Bitcoin? (Screen Shots)

[yoyoceramic]

So, this is really bugging me:

Withdrew 1 BTC from Mt. Gox:


Here is my Address Book in my Wallet:


Block Explorer shows that the withdrawal belonged to block 124730:
http://blockexplorer.com/address/1MnDCCGGCzJtGBmfPMfJm3jVuhr1fmzXct

I downloaded the block chain and this transaction never appeared in my wallet.  How could this happen?
 

[Quantumplation]

So, this is really bugging me:

Withdrew 1 BTC from Mt. Gox:


Here is my Address Book in my Wallet:


Block Explorer shows that the withdrawal belonged to block 124730:
http://blockexplorer.com/address/1MnDCCGGCzJtGBmfPMfJm3jVuhr1fmzXct

I downloaded the block chain and this transaction never appeared in my wallet.  How could this happen?
 

The block chain must still be downloading, or you have a different wallet in the client than contains that address.

[kjj]

Give a screenshot showing the blocks count in your client.

[yoyoceramic]

I blocked out the amounts I have received, but I kept the start of all the addresses visible.  My address book shows the address as one of "my" addresses.  Can my local copy of the blockchain get corrupted?


Thanks

[Alex Beckenham]

Your block count is really low for today... mine shows 127869 currently.

Edit: Sorry I re-read your post and see that your transaction is from block 124730.

Have you tried starting bitcoin with the -rescan option?

Otherwise, I'd try deleting the block chain altogether and downloading it all again.

[yoyoceramic]

But if I have downloaded the block number which contains the transaction, shouldn't it credit to my screen?

[kjj]

Is -rescan supported on the main branch?

[yoyoceramic]

Is -rescan supported on the main branch?

Not sure what that means?  I am not on linux....

[eof]

jump into #bitcoin-dev and ask in there.

The thing to check is that you have the private key to sign transactions for that address.

[kjj]

Close your bitcoin client.  Find the folder that bitcoin.exe is in.  Open a command prompt, go to that folder.  type "bitcoin -rescan".  See if that helps.

Has this wallet existed on this computer the whole time?  Or did you maybe copy it from somewhere else?

[Alex Beckenham]

I blocked out the amounts I have received, but I kept the start of all the addresses visible.

Sorry to have to tell you this but only 6 characters of an address are required to search for them on Block Explorer.

[yoyoceramic]

Ah cool - valuable info!  I still never found my coin though :/

[Pieter Wuille]

Which version are you using?

[CydeWeys]

Try running Bitcoin on another computer (including downloading a fresh copy of the whole blockchain), and copy over your wallet.dat and have it use that.

[yoyoceramic]

I am using version 3.20.2 BETA

What I can't understand is, if the address is showing up in my wallet.dat file how could I not be receiving credit for the transaction?

I will try running it on a fresh install.

I brought my laptop to work today.

[kjj]

I am using version 3.20.2 BETA

What I can't understand is, if the address is showing up in my wallet.dat file how could I not be receiving credit for the transaction?

I will try running it on a fresh install.

I brought my laptop to work today.

This is fixed now, but I don't know if it was fixed before or after 3.20.2 BETA.

At first, the wallet did not keep track of block numbers.  So, if you moved a wallet from a computer that had not seen a transaction to a computer that had seen a transaction, that transaction would not be applied to the wallet.

Basically, the node client keeps track of your balance by looking at each new block as it comes in.  If an address in the new block matches one of your keys, it increases or decreases the balance accordingly.  If you took a wallet processed on a node that had seen up to block 50,000 over to a node that had seen up to block 100,000, any transactions in blocks 50,001 to 99,999 would not be counted in your wallet, even though the network as a whole would still know what was going on.

With the new system, the wallet also keeps track of the last block processed.  So, if you do the same swap as in the last paragraph, the node will now know that it needs to look at the missing blocks.