[GLC] Globalcoin | 4 Year Anniversary 1.5.4! | NO IPO, NO PREMINE | [SCRYPT]

[CartmanSPC]

The 3 peers I can see are at 2 different starting heights, so I guess there's been a fork, and there are now two competing chains.

Yes, I've noticed the same thing. Perhaps you can try syncing from scratch.

[1714145349]

1714145349

[1714145349]

1714145349

[1714145349]

1714145349

[1714145349]

1714145349

[almightyruler]

How do we resolve this fork? In the absence of any further discussion here I chose Cryptopia as the de-facto master, and made two small deposits on both chains, but neither seem to be going through. Their 'coininfo' page only shows 1 connection, but the IP is not shown.

Megacrypton and Yobit don't seem to show peer IPs, either.

And now that I'm on the other chain (current height 2251501, no new blocks for around 3 weeks until I mined some to confirm transactions) the errors have started again...

************************
EXCEPTION: 11DbException
Db::get: Cannot allocate memory
globalcoin in ProcessMessages()

How can this coin have a slick new website and be listed on 3 exchanges, yet the network seems to be half collapsed and no one is posting into this thread about it?  


edit: A withdraw from cryptopia to megacrypton worked, but since I have no idea of the node IPs I don't know how to get onto that chain...

[CartmanSPC]

216.177.81.87 is a node on the longest chain. Try syncing with that one.

[almightyruler]

216.177.81.87 is a node on the longest chain. Try syncing with that one.

Yeah, but that's the chain which Cryptopia and Megacrypton are NOT on! I've confirmed it with a couple of test transfers between the exchanges. Cryptopia has been showing the Megacrypton transfer as 0/6 confirmations for a couple of days, so I suspect that the Cryptopia client is so busy reorganising (and failing each time) that it's not getting much else done.

In the absense of any other use for this coin (are there any merchants?) I think we should consider the chain that the exchanges are on to be the "proper" chain, even if it's not currently preferred by some clients. Some possible solutions to the current situation:

1) Try to strengthen the chain that the exchanges are on, so it becomes the preferred chain. This should stop the perpetual massive reorgs.
2) Convince the exchanges to move to the other chain.
3) Release a new client with hardened checkpoints to resolve the fork. (If dev chooses the "non exchange" chain then this becomes similar to #2, since exchanges will need to resync to match the checkpoints.)

I think #1 is probably the better solution in the long run, but I'm not sure whether it would work, or just make the discrepancies between the two chains (and the associated reorgs) worse.

Either way, choosing one side of a fork means that mining work is going to be lost from the other. Is anyone actually mining this coin?

[CartmanSPC]

Longest chain (currently) has the most hashrate. Generally, the rule in cryptos is the longest chain wins. Longest chain is not having any client issues.

[almightyruler]

Longest chain (currently) has the most hashrate. Generally, the rule in cryptos is the longest chain wins. Longest chain is not having any client issues.

Not much point in the coin if the strongest chain has only miners.

[Telescopium]

It strange that the big owners of this coin is not worried about the crisis. 
Just look at the Gulden (NLG). They moves this coin on the POS and paid for the development of mobile applications. Their capitalization is then increased by almost 40 times. Really strange that large GLC owners can not come together and pay several bitcoins for developer and transfer of coins on POS. That would solve all the problems with the network, and allows you to quickly increase the capitalization.

[CartmanSPC]

Longest chain (currently) has the most hashrate. Generally, the rule in cryptos is the longest chain wins. Longest chain is not having any client issues.

Not much point in the coin if the strongest chain has only miners.

I hear you...but the longest chain is also not having any issues (that I am aware of). It also has the most nodes (GLC wallets).

[Telescopium]

I was a little mistake when cited the example of the Gulden. It is best to base Potcoin (POT). They have recently moved to the algorithm POSv although until recently they were on the Scrypt.

The main problem is the net POW algorithm network instability with a small remuneration for miners or too low price on the stock exchange. In the event  a slight price increase may coming a big Asic miner and then arrange the fork. In the case to the motion on POS network control belongs to large owners of this coin. Enough to have a few big wallets Launched in operation 24 hours and the whole network will be well protected from attacks.

In addition, I see only advantages if the large owners of the coins will have a good POS revenue. These people are interested in development Globalcoin  and no unknown Asic miners will not affect the exchange rate and cost.

[CartmanSPC]

I've noticed someone has started mining the other chain again. It should be advisable that anyone using GLC not transfer any GLC during this time until this fork situation is resolved. I would be mostly concerned if you on the shortest chain as that one will most likely not survive.

I was going to say not a lot of transactions have occurred on the shortest chain but then yesterday 174,825 GLC was transferred. Most likely to an exchange on the short chain. Someone could sell all their GLC on an exchange that is on the short chain but would actually still have it in their wallet on the longest chain.

The exchanges should be contacted as they will be left holding the bag.

[allknowingeye]

216.177.81.87 is a node on the longest chain. Try syncing with that one.

Yeah, but that's the chain which Cryptopia and Megacrypton are NOT on!

I just checked Cryptopia and that is the one they are connected so has this problem resolved itself?

[allknowingeye]

More odd stuff, the blockchain viewer at https://chainz.cryptoid.info/glc/# says the Hosting for this blockchain will expire on 2016-11-17 (in 4.9 days).

Beginning to wonder what is going on.

[allknowingeye]

Do you have addnodes for the correct chain? I seem to be connected to 216.177.81.87.

[almightyruler]

This is the chain that the block explorer, Cryptopia and Megacrypton are on:

11/12/16 02:36:18 SetBestChain: new best=0564521bdc13d818307a  height=2263113  work=6477496162447123  date=11/12/16 02:36:14

This is the chain that 216.177.81.87, 129.21.131.183 and 37.187.96.15 are on:

11/12/16 02:36:34 SetBestChain: new best=dd7ca03a0f2fa8a6302c  height=2309718  work=6476312770397165  date=11/12/16 02:36:24

Note that the "shorter" chain is now actually the longer one (it has a higher work value)

[almightyruler]

This would explain why small test deposits from 2-3 weeks ago have suddenly appeared at Cryptopia, even though they were on the same chain as my client... I guess the miner strengthening that chain has stopped the fighting, and the client perpetually failing at trying to switch to the other chain.

[allknowingeye]

This is the chain that the block explorer, Cryptopia and Megacrypton are on:

11/12/16 02:36:18 SetBestChain: new best=0564521bdc13d818307a  height=2263113  work=6477496162447123  date=11/12/16 02:36:14

This is the chain that 216.177.81.87, 129.21.131.183 and 37.187.96.15 are on:

11/12/16 02:36:34 SetBestChain: new best=dd7ca03a0f2fa8a6302c  height=2309718  work=6476312770397165  date=11/12/16 02:36:24

Note that the "shorter" chain is now actually the longer one (it has a higher work value)

Cryptopia as of 30 seconds ago show 1 connection and that is too addnode=216.177.81.87:55789.

[almightyruler]

This is the chain that the block explorer, Cryptopia and Megacrypton are on:

11/12/16 02:36:18 SetBestChain: new best=0564521bdc13d818307a  height=2263113  work=6477496162447123  date=11/12/16 02:36:14

This is the chain that 216.177.81.87, 129.21.131.183 and 37.187.96.15 are on:

11/12/16 02:36:34 SetBestChain: new best=dd7ca03a0f2fa8a6302c  height=2309718  work=6476312770397165  date=11/12/16 02:36:24

Note that the "shorter" chain is now actually the longer one (it has a higher work value)

Cryptopia as of 30 seconds ago show 1 connection and that is too addnode=216.177.81.87:55789.

Would be really good if their coin info showed block count, or last block hash - otherwise, we're really just guessing about their client status relative to the rest of the network.

Could be that their client has chosen to switch (back) to the 216.177.81.87 chain, or that someone at Cryptopia has manually forced it to that one... or perhaps the info is cached, and stale?

Like I said, guessing.

I've set up a client on each chain, and although they're fetching blocks from both chains (with blocks on the opposing chain being marked as orphan), the one on the shorter chain doesn't seem to be interested in switching to the longer one. Perhaps the chain of orphans is simply too long.

The last block that both chains agree on is at height 2232040 (79167ddf0ae6353c29f25c4557a23ab3320eaa7a5b3c459b400181f9deccbcdc), and that was minted 43 days ago. That's a long time for an unresolved fork...

[allknowingeye]

So how do we resolve this? 43 days that is bad, super bad, some people going to be really pissed either way.
How can I make my client switch to the other chain? The only peer I can see is 216.177.81.87.

[CartmanSPC]

my globalcoin.conf file:

addnode=216.177.81.87
addnode=195.154.185.5
addnode=108.173.241.118
addnode=98.115.147.74
addnode=71.207.13.6
addnode=162.255.117.105
addnode=37.187.96.15
addnode=85.236.188.28
addnode=129.21.131.183
addnode=203.20.114.252
addnode=109.144.133.4
addnode=74.132.75.138
addnode=162.243.239.107
addnode=162.243.106.159
addnode=162.243.104.134
addnode=globalcoin.ddns.net
addnode=100.42.224.37

[almightyruler]

my globalcoin.conf file:

addnode=216.177.81.87
addnode=195.154.185.5
addnode=108.173.241.118
addnode=98.115.147.74
addnode=71.207.13.6
[...]

Hmm, interesting, there's a few IPs there that I don't see in my list, and when I restarted with manually configured addnodes I picked up a couple of new peers. With the Cryptopia coininfo page reporting only a single peer, I'm wondering if there's some issue (ie a bug) with propagating peer IPs through the network.