[ANN][XCN] Cryptonite - NEW Thread | 1st mini-blockchain coin | Bounties!

[pallas]

Pallas, deleting old transactions from the oldblock node localbase occurs only when running with the -prune tag? if node always on uptime miniblockchaine not work? not delete?

Mini-blockchain by default doesn't delete old block data (including transactions). That's by design: we want to be sure all the information about the wallet transactions is not lost.

That is, you are not sure about the mini block technology? and can you describe the possible risks? They(risks) fully understood?

What do you mean by "you are not sure about the mini block technology?"?
And what kind of risks are you asking about: technical ones like loosing coins and the like? If that's the question, I think the answer lies in the almost 4 years of the coin history, and still working and rocking!

Yes, I see that everything is working and swinging  , but you say that the deletion is disabled for a full node so that transactions are not lost, it means if you enable deletion on all full nodes by default, then there will be possible risks of transaction loss, so I ask you about these risks have a technical description of such situations? situations of loss of transactions?

In the case you are describing, the transactions are not lost, they are saved in the wallet database, and on the account balance sheet (as a final amount). And in the nodes who have a long enough blockchain, of course.
What you loose is the ability to see the transaction details. That is, they are shown with a question mark on the gui wallet. If you download a blockchain snapshot, that will be fixed, but you also get a big datadir as a side effect.
I think that the current default makes the most sense, but of course it is open for discussion.

[info_infoman]

Pallas, deleting old transactions from the oldblock node localbase occurs only when running with the -prune tag? if node always on uptime miniblockchaine not work? not delete?

Mini-blockchain by default doesn't delete old block data (including transactions). That's by design: we want to be sure all the information about the wallet transactions is not lost.

That is, you are not sure about the mini block technology? and can you describe the possible risks? They(risks) fully understood?

What do you mean by "you are not sure about the mini block technology?"?
And what kind of risks are you asking about: technical ones like loosing coins and the like? If that's the question, I think the answer lies in the almost 4 years of the coin history, and still working and rocking!

Yes, I see that everything is working and swinging  , but you say that the deletion is disabled for a full node so that transactions are not lost, it means if you enable deletion on all full nodes by default, then there will be possible risks of transaction loss, so I ask you about these risks have a technical description of such situations? situations of loss of transactions?

In the case you are describing, the transactions are not lost, they are saved in the wallet database, and on the account balance sheet (as a final amount). And in the nodes who have a long enough blockchain, of course.
What you loose is the ability to see the transaction details. That is, they are shown with a question mark on the gui wallet. If you download a blockchain snapshot, that will be fixed, but you also get a big datadir as a side effect.
I think that the current default makes the most sense, but of course it is open for discussion.

it's just a matter of the design of the design of the wallet and these transaction losses do not affect the balances? why not then design the database of transactions in the wallet, for example, in some way delete these old transactions, not only from the old blocks but also from the wallet database? We have a miniblock protocol, it should logically lead to a mini-wallet protocol?

PS sorry for my english google translate.....

[info_infoman]

  in the address book added a new tab p2p Exchange, this tab will add all requests for the purchase of coins.
The Name field is the amount that they want to buy, the Balance field is how much is already purchased, when the Balance is greater or equal to the field Name the entry is deleted from the address book.

[pallas]

Pallas, deleting old transactions from the oldblock node localbase occurs only when running with the -prune tag? if node always on uptime miniblockchaine not work? not delete?

Mini-blockchain by default doesn't delete old block data (including transactions). That's by design: we want to be sure all the information about the wallet transactions is not lost.

That is, you are not sure about the mini block technology? and can you describe the possible risks? They(risks) fully understood?

What do you mean by "you are not sure about the mini block technology?"?
And what kind of risks are you asking about: technical ones like loosing coins and the like? If that's the question, I think the answer lies in the almost 4 years of the coin history, and still working and rocking!

Yes, I see that everything is working and swinging  , but you say that the deletion is disabled for a full node so that transactions are not lost, it means if you enable deletion on all full nodes by default, then there will be possible risks of transaction loss, so I ask you about these risks have a technical description of such situations? situations of loss of transactions?

In the case you are describing, the transactions are not lost, they are saved in the wallet database, and on the account balance sheet (as a final amount). And in the nodes who have a long enough blockchain, of course.
What you loose is the ability to see the transaction details. That is, they are shown with a question mark on the gui wallet. If you download a blockchain snapshot, that will be fixed, but you also get a big datadir as a side effect.
I think that the current default makes the most sense, but of course it is open for discussion.

it's just a matter of the design of the design of the wallet and these transaction losses do not affect the balances? why not then design the database of transactions in the wallet, for example, in some way delete these old transactions, not only from the old blocks but also from the wallet database? We have a miniblock protocol, it should logically lead to a mini-wallet protocol?

PS sorry for my english google translate.....

While I tend to agree with you, I also think that people would get confused if they don't find their old transactions.

[info_infoman]

Pallas, deleting old transactions from the oldblock node localbase occurs only when running with the -prune tag? if node always on uptime miniblockchaine not work? not delete?

Mini-blockchain by default doesn't delete old block data (including transactions). That's by design: we want to be sure all the information about the wallet transactions is not lost.

That is, you are not sure about the mini block technology? and can you describe the possible risks? They(risks) fully understood?

What do you mean by "you are not sure about the mini block technology?"?
And what kind of risks are you asking about: technical ones like loosing coins and the like? If that's the question, I think the answer lies in the almost 4 years of the coin history, and still working and rocking!

Yes, I see that everything is working and swinging  , but you say that the deletion is disabled for a full node so that transactions are not lost, it means if you enable deletion on all full nodes by default, then there will be possible risks of transaction loss, so I ask you about these risks have a technical description of such situations? situations of loss of transactions?

In the case you are describing, the transactions are not lost, they are saved in the wallet database, and on the account balance sheet (as a final amount). And in the nodes who have a long enough blockchain, of course.
What you loose is the ability to see the transaction details. That is, they are shown with a question mark on the gui wallet. If you download a blockchain snapshot, that will be fixed, but you also get a big datadir as a side effect.
I think that the current default makes the most sense, but of course it is open for discussion.

it's just a matter of the design of the design of the wallet and these transaction losses do not affect the balances? why not then design the database of transactions in the wallet, for example, in some way delete these old transactions, not only from the old blocks but also from the wallet database? We have a miniblock protocol, it should logically lead to a mini-wallet protocol?

PS sorry for my english google translate.....

While I tend to agree with you, I also think that people would get confused if they don't find their old transactions.

on the transactions tab, just add an announcement - Transactions in the last 7 days 

[megainarmy]

my wallet hangs on this one (i downloaded the lastest snapshot) 
http://prntscr.com/gwk6tr

[pallas]

my wallet hangs on this one (i downloaded the lastest snapshot) 
http://prntscr.com/gwk6tr

What does the text in Russian means?

[megainarmy]

What does the text in Russian means?

6 days behind...

[pallas]

What does the text in Russian means?

6 days behind...

does it go ahead, albeit slowly, or is it just stuck?
could you please post a snippet of debug.log to better see what's going on?

[mak013]

is smth new from yobit?

[megainarmy]

does it go ahead, albeit slowly, or is it just stuck?
could you please post a snippet of debug.log to better see what's going on?

Everything is fine. Time from the 5th passed the synchronization. 

[pallas]

is smth new from yobit?

not yet
they don't speak much :-)

[gnasirator]

Update:

New Coin Request for bisq.network exchange is submitted.

Let's hope all goes well and we are accepted. I did everything I can to fulfill their requirements. It all should go smoothly.
Unfortunately, my server just started having issues so the explorer is down. I'm on it.

edit: back up & syncing from fresh

[pallas]

Update:

New Coin Request for bisq.network exchange is submitted.

Let's hope all goes well and we are accepted. I did everything I can to fulfill their requirements. It all should go smoothly.
Unfortunately, my server just started having issues so the explorer is down. I'm on it.

edit: back up & syncing from fresh

thanks!

[gnasirator]

Interesting fact I just learned about bisq: They support other base coins next to BTC.
Trading always goes FIAT/Altcoin <-> Basecoin.

As a result, I now have a new personal goal: Get bisq to add XCN as a base coin. That would be the perfect place because of our high similarity with BTC - at least with regards to usability.

Our faster transactions and way higher scaling potential should become interesting for traders in the future when BTC transaction fees skyrocket even further

[pallas]

Interesting fact I just learned about bisq: They support other base coins next to BTC.
Trading always goes FIAT/Altcoin <-> Basecoin.

As a result, I now have a new personal goal: Get bisq to add XCN as a base coin. That would be the perfect place because of our high similarity with BTC - at least with regards to usability.

Our faster transactions and way higher scaling potential should become interesting for traders in the future when BTC transaction fees skyrocket even further

Great idea! I hope the decentralised exchanges do finally pick up, maybe we will have less crypto dramas in the future.

[gnasirator]

I just cloned the wallet and did another compile and got this:

"/usr/include/c++/5/bits/unique_ptr.h:49:28: note: declared here
   template<typename> class auto_ptr;
                            ^
  CXX      net.o
  CXX      noui.o
  CXX      rpcblockchain.o
  CXX      rpcmining.o
rpcmining.cpp: In function ‘json_spirit::Value getblocktemplate(const Array&, bool)’:
rpcmining.cpp:575:52: error: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class CWallet’
         pblocktemplate = CreateNewBlock(pwalletMain->GetDefaultPubKey());
                                                    ^
In file included from rpcmining.cpp:9:0:
init.h:11:7: note: forward declaration of ‘class CWallet’
 class CWallet;
       ^
Makefile:882: recipe for target 'rpcmining.o' failed
make[3]: *** [rpcmining.o] Error 1
make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[3]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:904: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:676: recipe for target 'all' failed
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:510: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
"

is something not working in there?
my .configure:
 ./configure CFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -fno-builtin-malloc -fno-builtin-calloc -fno-builtin-realloc -fno-builtin-free"  CXXFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -fno-builtin-malloc -fno-builtin-calloc -fno-builtin-realloc -fno-builtin-free" CRYPTO_LIBS="-lcrypto -ltcmalloc" --without-gui --disable-wallet

[pallas]

I just cloned the wallet and did another compile and got this:

"/usr/include/c++/5/bits/unique_ptr.h:49:28: note: declared here
   template<typename> class auto_ptr;
                            ^
  CXX      net.o
  CXX      noui.o
  CXX      rpcblockchain.o
  CXX      rpcmining.o
rpcmining.cpp: In function ‘json_spirit::Value getblocktemplate(const Array&, bool)’:
rpcmining.cpp:575:52: error: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class CWallet’
         pblocktemplate = CreateNewBlock(pwalletMain->GetDefaultPubKey());
                                                    ^
In file included from rpcmining.cpp:9:0:
init.h:11:7: note: forward declaration of ‘class CWallet’
 class CWallet;
       ^
Makefile:882: recipe for target 'rpcmining.o' failed
make[3]: *** [rpcmining.o] Error 1
make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[3]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:904: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:676: recipe for target 'all' failed
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/xcn/Cryptonite/src'
Makefile:510: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
"

is something not working in there?
my .configure:
 ./configure CFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -fno-builtin-malloc -fno-builtin-calloc -fno-builtin-realloc -fno-builtin-free"  CXXFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -fno-builtin-malloc -fno-builtin-calloc -fno-builtin-realloc -fno-builtin-free" CRYPTO_LIBS="-lcrypto -ltcmalloc" --without-gui --disable-wallet

does it do the same if you remove all the malloc related flags?

[info_infoman]

Since the btc38 has taken off XCN, its trading volume has been reduced a lot. I don't know how it's going to be. I want a better exchange to go public，such as cryptopia.

[pallas]

Since the btc38 has taken off XCN, its trading volume has been reduced a lot. I don't know how it's going to be. I want a better exchange to go public，such as cryptopia.

We currently have open addcoin procedures for bittrex, poloniex and yobit.