Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2024, 01:51:30 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Are we stress testing again?  (Read 33192 times)
Biitcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 353
Merit: 250


Zichain


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2015, 09:10:48 PM
 #21

Weird stuff going on .
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/0c6429646bfe986c4d34d72f6592632cbbf0b6b890c42cb23ef06ba6456c1123

Never had this message on BlockTrail , there is no "High Priority" message : Priority :   28,751,614 < 28,800,000

Quote
10,000,000    *    374    =    3,740,000,000
10,000,000    *    380    =    3,800,000,000
20,000,000    *    378    =    7,560,000,000
20,000,000    *    381    =    7,620,000,000
10,010,000    *    386    =    3,863,860,000
300,000,000    *    380    =    114,000,000,000
30,730,793    *    377    =    11,585,508,961
400,000,000    *    371    =    148,400,000,000
   300,569,368,961 age
300,569,368,961    /    10 kB    =    28,751,614 priority
required for high priority; 28,800,000


Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:10:59 PM
 #22

13Mb of unconfirmed ...

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

 Grin they really want the block liberation ...
melody82
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 257


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:13:33 PM
 #23

Bummer.  Why are they testing again, didn't they prove their point the first time around?  Maybe it is a different entity this time, but the timing is horrible.  With the Greece thing BTC is getting some nice press, and this is the worst time to clog up the system because new adopters won't understand that it isn't business as usual.  So the experiment proved pretty much what it intended to prove:  if you muck up the network, then it gets mucked up!
OROBTC
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1895



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:14:19 PM
 #24

...

Yes, and it looks like they are still at it.  Below address is one of a long chain of about $49.21, all but one with value of $0.00:

https://blockchain.info/address/1Lc8DpFMWC2Ze33Wj2tpwjqFrBP4s9LjLH

*   *   *

I have not seen this before.  Does anyone else have a similar experience to share?  

Confirmation times of hours is unacceptable.

It would be very interesting to learn who is responsible...
shorena
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1540


No I dont escrow anymore.


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:17:22 PM
 #25

So the solution is more node's or miners?

Bigger blocks. More miners will not make finding blocks faster as difficulty adjusts and more nodes will do nothing at all to reduce the number of unconfirmed transactions, they will just help relay them (and blocks).

Bummer.  Why are they testing again, didn't they prove their point the first time around?  Maybe it is a different entity this time, but the timing is horrible.  With the Greece thing BTC is getting some nice press, and this is the worst time to clog up the system because new adopters won't understand that it isn't business as usual.  So the experiment proved pretty much what it intended to prove:  if you muck up the network, then it gets mucked up!

IIRC both tests failed.

Im not really here, its just your imagination.
jbrnt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:18:23 PM
Last edit: July 06, 2015, 10:20:30 PM by jbrnt
 #26


I got the hex of your transaction and try to push it to the network from blockchain.info. Received this error:
"The Maximum number of outputs in a single transaction is 200"

Look at your transaction on another explorer:
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/0c6429646bfe986c4d34d72f6592632cbbf0b6b890c42cb23ef06ba6456c1123
It has 8 inputs and 238 outputs.

The problem is the size, miners don't like large transactions with just enough fees. I estimated the transaction size to be 9.6kb, so your 0.0011btc fee should be enough. Just wait it out. It should confirm when there are less transactions in the mempool. The transaction is 8btc, so it's priority will shoot up in a few hours.

Why did you put all 238 outputs in 1 transaction? I think it would be easier to confirm if you split it into 3 to 4 smaller transactions.
hcf27
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 257
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:42:33 PM
 #27

The whole of blockchain seems pretty stressed.... made a transaction from bitreserve this morning and it is still not even showing on blockchain.info... the funny thing is I made a transaction during last week stress too lol.. getting used to it now.. but buying a lot of litecoin as well... i think its looking like a good option now
scarsbergholden
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 PM
 #28

I guess a bigger block mb size will help in cases like this, is stress testing really a good way to point out to others that bitcoin needs bigger size blocks, then it comes the dilemma of miner saying one size and core developers an other.

tss
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 500


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 10:03:25 PM
 #29

I guess a bigger block mb size will help in cases like this, is stress testing really a good way to point out to others that bitcoin needs bigger size blocks, then it comes the dilemma of miner saying one size and core developers an other.

uhhmm NO.  bigger blocks has nothing to do with this. 

if you want to send out dust (not sure why you would) you shouldn't expect it to be confirmed right away or at all.

bigger blocks can be filled just as fast with spam transactions as it doesn't cost much of anything.  filling 20mb blocks will cause problems with nodes not getting blocks synced.

regular transactions are NOT affected.
unent
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 326
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 10:03:52 PM
 #30

The whole of blockchain seems pretty stressed.... made a transaction from bitreserve this morning and it is still not even showing on blockchain.info... the funny thing is I made a transaction during last week stress too lol.. getting used to it now.. but buying a lot of litecoin as well... i think its looking like a good option now

I sent something from an exchange about four hours ago and it's been showing on blockchain.info for hours. The only problem is it's still unconfirmed. I think we'll be lucky if our transactions get confirmed by tomorrow. The stress testers are learning how to do more damage from each test.
GenTarkin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2450
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 10:06:03 PM
 #31

I guess a bigger block mb size will help in cases like this, is stress testing really a good way to point out to others that bitcoin needs bigger size blocks, then it comes the dilemma of miner saying one size and core developers an other.

uhhmm NO.  bigger blocks has nothing to do with this. 

if you want to send out dust (not sure why you would) you shouldn't expect it to be confirmed right away or at all.

bigger blocks can be filled just as fast with spam transactions as it doesn't cost much of anything.  filling 20mb blocks will cause problems with nodes not getting blocks synced.

regular transactions are NOT affected.

I think u missed the point of the stress tests, well the only way I can figure ... is to prove that if this were to become bitcoin's normal tx rate anytime, then the blocksize would need to be made larger. Because a constant tx rate of over just 7 tx/s I think?? will cause all sorts of tx confirmation delays at the current blocksize limitation.

GenTarkin's MOD Kncminer Titan custom firmware! v1.0.4! -- !!NO LONGER AVAILABLE!!
Donations: bitcoin- 1Px71mWNQNKW19xuARqrmnbcem1dXqJ3At || litecoin- LYXrLis3ik6TRn8tdvzAyJ264DRvwYVeEw
yayayo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1024



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 10:29:48 PM
 #32

I guess a bigger block mb size will help in cases like this, is stress testing really a good way to point out to others that bitcoin needs bigger size blocks, then it comes the dilemma of miner saying one size and core developers an other.

uhhmm NO.  bigger blocks has nothing to do with this. 

if you want to send out dust (not sure why you would) you shouldn't expect it to be confirmed right away or at all.

bigger blocks can be filled just as fast with spam transactions as it doesn't cost much of anything.  filling 20mb blocks will cause problems with nodes not getting blocks synced.

regular transactions are NOT affected.

Yes, the costs for scaling the "block-filling-attack" are minimal for any serious attacker. In fact, what these stupid stress tests prove is that 1) there is no serious problem for non-dust transactions and 2) the (non-existent) problem would certainly not be solved by increasing the max-blocksize.

The only real solution is a healthy fee market. I had no problems getting my tx confirmed - just don't send dust and pay an adequate fee and you'll be fine. Dust transactions can happen on sidechains or off-chain. These transaction do not require the same level of security as ordinary transactions.

ya.ya.yo!

.
..1xBit.com   Super Six..
▄█████████████▄
████████████▀▀▀
█████████████▄
█████████▌▀████
██████████  ▀██
██████████▌   ▀
████████████▄▄
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
▀██████████████
███████████████
█████████████▀
█████▀▀       
███▀ ▄███     ▄
██▄▄████▌    ▄█
████████       
████████▌     
█████████    ▐█
██████████   ▐█
███████▀▀   ▄██
███▀   ▄▄▄█████
███ ▄██████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████▀▀▀█
██████████     
███████████▄▄▄█
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
         ▄█████
        ▄██████
       ▄███████
      ▄████████
     ▄█████████
    ▄███████
   ▄███████████
  ▄████████████
 ▄█████████████
▄██████████████
  ▀▀███████████
      ▀▀███
████
          ▀▀
          ▄▄██▌
      ▄▄███████
     █████████▀

 ▄██▄▄▀▀██▀▀
▄██████     ▄▄▄
███████   ▄█▄ ▄
▀██████   █  ▀█
 ▀▀▀
    ▀▄▄█▀
▄▄█████▄    ▀▀▀
 ▀████████
   ▀█████▀ ████
      ▀▀▀ █████
          █████
       ▄  █▄▄ █ ▄
     ▀▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
      ▀ ▄▄█████▄█▄▄
    ▄ ▄███▀    ▀▀ ▀▀▄
  ▄██▄███▄ ▀▀▀▀▄  ▄▄
  ▄████████▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄██
 ████████████▀▀    █ ▐█
██████████████▄ ▄▄▀██▄██
 ▐██████████████    ▄███
  ████▀████████████▄███▀
  ▀█▀  ▐█████████████▀
       ▐████████████▀
       ▀█████▀▀▀ █▀
.
Premier League
LaLiga
Serie A
.
Bundesliga
Ligue 1
Primeira Liga
.
..TAKE PART..
ajareselde
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1000

Satoshi is rolling in his grave. #bitcoin


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 10:39:27 PM
 #33

Well i just received a transaction without any issue, but i see that unconfirmed transactions are at 10 000, and mempool at 12 MB tho.
Don't know if the bigger block sizes only are the solution to this problem, but something definitely needs to be done, because if there's a lot of people that cant get their transactions confirmed, it's looking bad.

cheers
Alley
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 11:03:56 PM
 #34

172,000 transactions in last 24 hours.  A record.  Over 200k soon?  Sounds like they should of solved the block size increase issue weeks ago rather then arguing about it.
Mikestang
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 11:07:23 PM
 #35

and this is the worst time to clog up the system because new adopters won't understand that it isn't business as usual. 

Quite the contrary, if you want attention this is the best time to get it, when everyone is looking.

Bigger blocks can be filled up with dust transactions just as easily.
sbankerdemon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


http://pachinko.games-bit.com/


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 11:10:01 PM
 #36

What could be the possible solution for this. Cant this spamming stopped somehow?

Kazimir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011



View Profile
July 06, 2015, 11:15:40 PM
 #37

What could be the possible solution for this. Cant this spamming stopped somehow?
Nodes should filter out dust transactions.

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
Insert coin(s): 1KazimirL9MNcnFnoosGrEkmMsbYLxPPob
Alley
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 11:16:32 PM
 #38

But there paying tx fees so miners are happy to put them through?
cellard
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1252


View Profile
July 07, 2015, 12:02:35 AM
 #39


I don't personally think so. I just did a transaction and I quickly had 3 confirmations (as seen in blockchain.info). Your post was 1 day tho so who knows.
ChetnotAtkins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 131
Merit: 101


View Profile
July 07, 2015, 12:51:17 AM
 #40

Spam ramped up to full power again, over 600 transactions/second at peak, still over 100/second right now.

Over 37,000 unconfirmed transactions, 30+ mb in the mempool.

Yes this one is interesting again. It seems they improved their server setup over the last trials
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!