[BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED]

[Deprived]

Alright, this time it cost me.

AM-PT was freezing me out while trying to post bids and I missed a juicy selloff...

EDIT: Pretty sure it's an issue with 2fa on ordering.

Don't think it's to do with 2fa on ordering.

The problem I'm seeing today is that at times it's failing to obtain the balance of shares OR cash on ordering screens.  So for example just now I was unable to place orders at all on DMS.PURCHASE (from the issuing account) as when the page loaded it showed:

Balance: ฿ / Reserved: ฿ 0 / Available: ฿ 0
Other Reserved: ฿ 0 / Max To Avoid Order Cancels: ฿ 0

Notice it isn't showing a Balance of 0, but no balance at all.

Here's actual balance (from top of screen) :  Balance: 597.51181134

I've had same thing on the selling side as well - where it shows no share balance.

It basically seems to be timing out on reading data - then blocking placing orders as it doesn't think you have anything to buy or sell.  It fixes itself after after a few refreshes.  Depending on browser the page either doesn't load (what you're seeing) or does load but with missing data (what I'm seeing usually - though I've had the not loading at all problem in the past).

I'd guess it's all down to the strange policy of querying the BTC wallets rather than having that data store in a table (with a cronjob to add to the table when deposits are found and regularly check for block-chain forks etc).  That seems to be the main bottle-neck that's crippling performance.

[1715534918]

1715534918

[1715534918]

1715534918

[1715534918]

1715534918

[1715534918]

1715534918

[1715534918]

1715534918

[FloatesMcgoates]

I am running into a glitch where on the screen for a particular security I am not being displayed the correct amount of shares I own if I have one open ask order up. If I have say 50 shares and I have 30 on an open sale order, It will not say I have 20 shares left but will display

Shares: / Reserved: / Available: 0


As soon as I cancel my order then the correct numbers will display, but presently I seem unable to have multiple open orders at different price points because of this glitch.


Edit: Scratch that it appears to have fixed itself (?)

[burnside]

Hi all, appreciate the reports.  I think the issue is around some caching I implemented recently for the 'my orders' part of each individual security page.  It all goes back to the getbalance performance, as Deprived suggested.  It sounds like when it fails to load it's caching the failure.  This is a display bug, not a data integrity issue.  Hopefully I'll have some time tonight to look at it.

Cheers.

[lunarboy]

Any plans to intergrate with WeExchange ?
similar to bitfunder it would be good to link my accounts and prevent unauthorised withdrawal.

would require issuing a 'Merchant Authorization Token'

[Deprived]

Any plans to intergrate with WeExchange ?
similar to bitfunder it would be good to link my accounts and prevent unauthorised withdrawal.

would require issuing a 'Merchant Authorization Token'

There's about zero chance of that.

Weexchange is run by Ukyo who runs Bitfunder.  So having the funds for Bitfunder managed by it adds no great amount of Counter-Party risk (as it's primarily Ukyo who could steal from both).

If BTC-TC were to use Weexchange then suddenly all funds deposited in BTC-TC could be stolen by BOTH ukyo AND burnside - so we'd have gone from one person being able to take our funds to two.

Bitfunder using Weexchange DOES add some small measure of extra security (a thief using, say, a key-logger needs to log your login information for TWO sites instead of one to steal).  But if you use a yubi-key on BTC-TC then you've already prevented nearly all thefts relying on weakness at the user's end anyway.

In terms of wallet security (at supplier's end) then Weexchange doesn't add anything - someone needs to get to the Weexchange wallet instead of a Bitfunder is the only difference.

It's the doubling of CP risk that makes the suggestion unworkable - in fact it would FAR more than double the CP risk (if we were to assume burnside and Ukyo were equally trustworthy) for a few slightly more complicated reasons.

[ThickAsThieves]

Any plans to intergrate with WeExchange ?
similar to bitfunder it would be good to link my accounts and prevent unauthorised withdrawal.

would require issuing a 'Merchant Authorization Token'

There's about zero chance of that.

Weexchange is run by Ukyo who runs Bitfunder.  So having the funds for Bitfunder managed by it adds no great amount of Counter-Party risk (as it's primarily Ukyo who could steal from both).

If BTC-TC were to use Weexchange then suddenly all funds deposited in BTC-TC could be stolen by BOTH ukyo AND burnside - so we'd have gone from one person being able to take our funds to two.

Bitfunder using Weexchange DOES add some small measure of extra security (a thief using, say, a key-logger needs to log your login information for TWO sites instead of one to steal).  But if you use a yubi-key on BTC-TC then you've already prevented nearly all thefts relying on weakness at the user's end anyway.

In terms of wallet security (at supplier's end) then Weexchange doesn't add anything - someone needs to get to the Weexchange wallet instead of a Bitfunder is the only difference.

It's the doubling of CP risk that makes the suggestion unworkable - in fact it would FAR more than double the CP risk (if we were to assume burnside and Ukyo were equally trustworthy) for a few slightly more complicated reasons.

It's also totally unnecessary to have this feature in Weex. Your BTCT.co account already has a wallet. If you want to send Weex coins there, you already can.

[Deprived]

Any plans to intergrate with WeExchange ?
similar to bitfunder it would be good to link my accounts and prevent unauthorised withdrawal.

would require issuing a 'Merchant Authorization Token'

There's about zero chance of that.

Weexchange is run by Ukyo who runs Bitfunder.  So having the funds for Bitfunder managed by it adds no great amount of Counter-Party risk (as it's primarily Ukyo who could steal from both).

If BTC-TC were to use Weexchange then suddenly all funds deposited in BTC-TC could be stolen by BOTH ukyo AND burnside - so we'd have gone from one person being able to take our funds to two.

Bitfunder using Weexchange DOES add some small measure of extra security (a thief using, say, a key-logger needs to log your login information for TWO sites instead of one to steal).  But if you use a yubi-key on BTC-TC then you've already prevented nearly all thefts relying on weakness at the user's end anyway.

In terms of wallet security (at supplier's end) then Weexchange doesn't add anything - someone needs to get to the Weexchange wallet instead of a Bitfunder is the only difference.

It's the doubling of CP risk that makes the suggestion unworkable - in fact it would FAR more than double the CP risk (if we were to assume burnside and Ukyo were equally trustworthy) for a few slightly more complicated reasons.

It's also totally unnecessary to have this feature in Weex. Your BTCT.co account already has a wallet. If you want to send Weex coins there, you already can.

True - you can already do it, and as BTC-TC doesn't wait for many confirmations anyway it won't even take very long for funds to show up.

[burnside]

Hi all, appreciate the reports.  I think the issue is around some caching I implemented recently for the 'my orders' part of each individual security page.  It all goes back to the getbalance performance, as Deprived suggested.  It sounds like when it fails to load it's caching the failure.  This is a display bug, not a data integrity issue.  Hopefully I'll have some time tonight to look at it.

Cheers.

Following up on this.  I have a fix in place.  Please let me know if you see the missing display behavior again.

[Deprived]

As I have mentioned in other threads, I am attempting to increase the liquidity of LTC-GLOBAL and BTC-TRADING-PT.
I can manually do a stock split manually,

How would you do this?

As far as I can see an asset issuer only knows the email address of those holding shares - not the account name (which is what is needed to transfer shares).  So you'd either need to already know who all your investors were - or rely on them responding to an email from you telling you the account name to transfer to.

I ask because, as you probably know, a stock split is under discussion for LTC-ATF - and I couldn't figure out a way to be able to be certain I could do it manually even if I wanted to.

[burnside]

As I have mentioned in other threads, I am attempting to increase the liquidity of LTC-GLOBAL and BTC-TRADING-PT.
Another way to increase liquidity would be to do a stock split. Increasing the number of shares and lowering their value will probably increase trading volume. Higher volume at lower prices is better than lower volume at higher prices.

I would like to do a 10 for 1 split on BTC-TRADING-PT. The value of a share of BTC-TRADING-PT has increased nearly 1600% in dollar terms from $1.80 to about $30. The split would return it to a value that would be more convenient for more people.

I can manually do a stock split manually, but it would be better if the exchange provided support for it -- not only in changing the number of shares and the prices everywhere, but also but keeping track and updating the history and statistics appropriately.

Burnside,

You mentioned before that you were waiting for a specific date before you could do a stock split on LTC-GLOBAL. I bet that there are several other securities that would like to do a stock split now if you could implement the feature.

How likely is it that you could implement a stock split feature in the near future? Or should I do it manually?

It's on the site todo list and really isn't hard programmatically.  Just lock the security, clear the book, and iterate through the share quantities multiplying as you go.  I haven't done it yet though because no one has needed it yet.  Sounds like it's time.    I'll note though that it will always be an admin only process.  It won't be something that can be done without oversight.

Cheers.

[coco23]

Hi,

something weird happened to me today: I put in a order to buy TAT.Asicminer a few hours ago. That order was fulfilled (see log). However, only seconds later everything I just bought was sold automatically for a lower price (while I was sleeping and offline), so that I lost a few BTC-cents.

2013-06-16 07:26:01    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    8    0.028001    0.00056002    0.22344798
2013-06-16 07:25:59    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    2    0.028002    0.00014001    0.05586399
2013-06-16 07:25:57    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    14    0.028005    0.00098017    0.39108982
2013-06-16 07:25:40    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    25    0.028006    0.00175037    0.69839962
2013-06-16 07:25:39    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    1    0.0281    0.00007025    0.02802975
2013-06-16 07:25:33    TAT.ASICMINER    buy    50    0.028201    0.00352512    1.41357512

How can this happen? A bug? Anyway to get my loss back? (Dont want it too happen with a bigger amount of BTC)

Thanks

edit:
I just realized but this is now a more serious problem for me:
I never actually got the BTCs from the selling! The sales should add up to almost 1.4 BTC, but I never received them and above log is the last activity on my account.

There is no other suspicious activity so that I suppose its a software bug.

Burnside please help!

[burnside]

Hi,

something weird happened to me today: I put in a order to buy TAT.Asicminer a few hours ago. That order was fulfilled (see log). However, only seconds later everything I just bought was sold automatically for a lower price (while I was sleeping and offline), so that I lost a few BTC-cents.

2013-06-16 07:26:01    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    8    0.028001    0.00056002    0.22344798
2013-06-16 07:25:59    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    2    0.028002    0.00014001    0.05586399
2013-06-16 07:25:57    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    14    0.028005    0.00098017    0.39108982
2013-06-16 07:25:40    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    25    0.028006    0.00175037    0.69839962
2013-06-16 07:25:39    TAT.ASICMINER    sell    1    0.0281    0.00007025    0.02802975
2013-06-16 07:25:33    TAT.ASICMINER    buy    50    0.028201    0.00352512    1.41357512

How can this happen? A bug? Anyway to get my loss back? (Dont want it too happen with a bigger amount of BTC)

Thanks

edit:
I just realized but this is now a more serious problem for me:
I never actually got the BTCs from the selling! The sales should add up to almost 1.4 BTC, but I never received them and above log is the last activity on my account.

There is no other suspicious activity so that I suppose its a software bug.

Burnside please help!

Can you PM me your btct.co username?  I'll look into it.

Cheers.

[burnside]

Thanks for the quick solution

No problem.  Glad I could help.

[Lohoris]

In "My Value Analysis" tab the "Total Paid" does not include the fee, which might be a bit misleading — especially considering that "My Trades" tab includes it instead.
Is this intentional?
If it is, at least some kind of small warning would be nice.

[dexX7]

What request inverval on /api/tradeHistory would you be comfortable with?

[joele]

How come the time in the top page CST is diffirent to the CST here http://www.thetimenow.com/cst/central_standard_time

[parseval]

What request inverval on /api/tradeHistory would you be comfortable with?

I have it on ten minutes for my chart site, and haven't had any complaints.  Though, now I am working on reading from the bot in #bitcoin-assets as a realtime data source for something quicker that won't bombard the site.  http://www.coinflow.co

[tiberiandusk]

Server having problems? Can't get it to load.

Edit:

It's working now.

[burnside]

What request inverval on /api/tradeHistory would you be comfortable with?

That one is pretty heavily cached, it only refreshes every 10 minutes or so.  So a 10 minute interval is probably ideal.

Cheers.

[burnside]

How come the time in the top page CST is diffirent to the CST here http://www.thetimenow.com/cst/central_standard_time

Maybe php recognizes DST?  That site you linked has a note on it:

Important note:
Most cities located in Central Standard Time (CST) zone currently observe Daylight Saving Time (DST).
Therefore, most cities there are using Central Daylight Time (CDT).

If it's wildly off, let me know, I'll spend more time on it.

Cheers.