New Ixcoin fork -> I0coin

[twobits]

this wont fix i0coin, i0coin has a huge amount of memleaks...

Yes it will, because those memleaks are not in bitcoin nor in the merged mining patches.

leveldb will not,   some other changes done at the same time will help.   However I am still unconvinced i0coin having memleaks is the root cause of the issue.  I think it is an issue that is present in at least some of the mm patches.   I noticed that at the point that the mm kicks in, the memory usage starts to grow at the rate of about 10x per block as it did before the mm kicks in.

Additionally, I think the same behavior is in nmc test. I also see evidence of it in coiledcoin, and groupcoin.   I think the reason we don't see it for devcoin and nmc, is that the major pools for these form their blocks outside of the *coind codes logic.

http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=972

I just don't have the tools and resources locally set up to dig into this further, and was unable to find a good enough online block explorer to do so.  Since I am pretty much out of disk space on my laptop, it is going to be awhile till I can get back into digging into this, so hopefully someone else can beat me to it.

They are due to some stupid pointless garbage hack or other, or even just a typo or something, in I0Coin, if they exist at all.

Are you sure of this?

So we take a fully working nice up to date merged mined coin, and change the name, ports, IRC channel, etc etc and presto,a new incarnation of I0Coin but this time without putting stupid memleaks crap into it nor stupid DNS lookup crap into it nor any other useless or damaging crap into it.

Why are you so sure it is a memleak?   I think it is simply due to the issue above with mm, and the  number of blocks i0 has compared to the other chains.  dns lookup crap is due to it using ntp internally to enforce shorter windows of timestamps.   I know I used to advocate for a nontp option at least so on systems already keeping good time (running ntp already for example), all this crap can be turned off, and stop the load on the ntp public servers, and network use that is unneeded etc.

[K1773R]

this wont fix i0coin, i0coin has a huge amount of memleaks...

Yes it will, because those memleaks are not in bitcoin nor in the merged mining patches.

leveldb will not,   some other changes done at the same time will help.   However I am still unconvinced i0coin having memleaks is the root cause of the issue.  I think it is an issue that is present in at least some of the mm patches.   I noticed that at the point that the mm kicks in, the memory usage starts to grow at the rate of about 10x per block as it did before the mm kicks in.

Additionally, I think the same behavior is in nmc test. I also see evidence of it in coiledcoin, and groupcoin.   I think the reason we don't see it for devcoin and nmc, is that the major pools for these form their blocks outside of the *coind codes logic.

http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=972

I just don't have the tools and resources locally set up to dig into this further, and was unable to find a good enough online block explorer to do so.  Since I am pretty much out of disk space on my laptop, it is going to be awhile till I can get back into digging into this, so hopefully someone else can beat me to it.

They are due to some stupid pointless garbage hack or other, or even just a typo or something, in I0Coin, if they exist at all.

Are you sure of this?

So we take a fully working nice up to date merged mined coin, and change the name, ports, IRC channel, etc etc and presto,a new incarnation of I0Coin but this time without putting stupid memleaks crap into it nor stupid DNS lookup crap into it nor any other useless or damaging crap into it.

Why are you so sure it is a memleak?   I think it is simply due to the issue above with mm, and the  number of blocks i0 has compared to the other chains.  dns lookup crap is due to it using ntp internally to enforce shorter windows of timestamps.   I know I used to advocate for a nontp option at least so on systems already keeping good time (running ntp already for example), all this crap can be turned off, and stop the load on the ntp public servers, and network use that is unneeded etc.

according to valgrind every CheckBlock creates 1+ leak, no matter if you mined it or someone else. ive only saw this so far in i0coin
using the basic tools for debugging before assumptions is a good idea

[twobits]

according to valgrind every CheckBlock creates 1+ leak, no matter if you mined it or someone else. ive only saw this so far in i0coin
using the basic tools for debugging before assumptions is a good idea

I did not see that yet. Maybe running out of ram screwed up my valgrind results?  Though I don't even see anything in CheckBlock, in the version I have, that allocates memory off hand.    What assumptions are being made?    CheckBlock also is called regardless of mm being on or not,  it would not explain the rapid growth in memory usage once the mm blocks are hit would it?  Hopefully I can get a new computer soon and actually run i0coin again to get better data.

BTW, could you add block size to the information shown on your blockexporer?

[K1773R]

according to valgrind every CheckBlock creates 1+ leak, no matter if you mined it or someone else. ive only saw this so far in i0coin
using the basic tools for debugging before assumptions is a good idea

I did not see that yet. Maybe running out of ram screwed up my valgrind results?  Though I don't even see anything in CheckBlock, in the version I have, that allocates memory off hand.    What assumptions are being made?    CheckBlock also is called regardless of mm being on or not,  it would not explain the rapid growth in memory usage once the mm blocks are hit would it?  Hopefully I can get a new computer soon and actually run i0coin again to get better data.

BTW, could you add block size to the information shown on your blockexporer?

my blockexplorer isnt really kept up to date as its an older version and i have to find a fix for the HD trashing... take a look @ the last block and you see only DVC is actually up to date.

EDIT: namecoin started again, this wont trash my HD so hard

[milly6]

Is Ixcoin taking hash-power away from the BTC network?
As of the typing of this only 4.76 bl/hr are being generated.
We really need to get merged mining going, otherwise when Oh-look another-coin comes along we'll be down to 3 bl/hr.
   

wow what do you think about this comment now?

[AceCobra1]

So is this coin dead ?

[markm]

No way. It is back on Bitparking's mmpool merged mining pool since a while back when it was the first of the merged mined coins to get a fix for a RAM hogging problem that all merged mined coins would ultimately have come up against.

It is also on at least one exchange: Vircurex.

-MarkM-

[jubalix]

this coin will overtake ixcoin as it has all the benefits none of the premine

[allcrypt]

Well for what it's worth we added i0Coin to AllCrypt.com - tho a thread with no posts for almost 2 months doesn't bode well for it sticking around...

[Vlad2Vlad]

this coin will overtake ixcoin as it has all the benefits none of the premine

How is the overtake prediction working out for you guys?

The i0Coin devs forgot to embed special hidden Aramaic meanings.  lol, that's iXcoin's real secret weapon.

 
Edit:  i0Coin doesn't even have a block explorer?  Sad.

[jubalix]

this coin will overtake ixcoin as it has all the benefits none of the premine

How is the overtake prediction working out for you guys?

The i0Coin devs forgot to embed special hidden Aramaic meanings.  lol, that's iXcoin's real secret weapon.

 
Edit:  i0Coin doesn't even have a block explorer?  Sad.

well its attracted Vlad to comment!

More seriously though it offers all the benefits of IXC with none of the negatives.

[Vlad2Vlad]

this coin will overtake ixcoin as it has all the benefits none of the premine

How is the overtake prediction working out for you guys?

The i0Coin devs forgot to embed special hidden Aramaic meanings.  lol, that's iXcoin's real secret weapon.

 
Edit:  i0Coin doesn't even have a block explorer?  Sad.

well its attracted Vlad to comment!

More seriously though it offers all the benefits of IXC with none of the negatives.

You mean besides the 3 times i0Coin died?

And the fact iXcoin is much more secure at nearly 80 Peta Hash?

Other than that, it's better than IXC. 

Joking Around guys, I see your point but it looks like some very powerful people have already chosen iXcoin.  Maybe it's time to join the VladFest.

Cheers!

[jubalix]

3 times dead and still going means it likely unkillable.

met 80 PTH v 10 PTH at that point who cares?

[Vlad2Vlad]

Do you guys have a block explorer?  I can't find one.

Thanks.

[$wisscheese]

Do you guys have a block explorer?  I can't find one.

Thanks.

i0coin is just two rows up from ixcoin at http://altexplorer.net/

[brooksby]

You mean besides the 3 times i0Coin died?

Joking Around guys, I see your point but it looks like some very powerful people have already chosen iXcoin.  Maybe it's time to join the VladFest.

Cheers!

I know you're mostly joking, but for the record I0coin didn't really die 3 times.  You could say it died once, but that's it.  It went down to probably just two or three clients mining.  It "died" because the client was using too much memory so all pools stopped mining it.  There was a failed attempt at a version 0.6 client, but it was never adopted by the pools because the merged mining didn't work.   That was fixed in Aug-2013.  Now I0coin is super stable, and from what I've read, iXcoin is based on the 0.8 version of I0coin.  So iXcoin coin actually owes I0coin for its latest stable update.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Is this the official thread for i0Coin?

I noticed vircurex dropped the coin from trading and f2pool dropped the mining so i0 has been left for dead.

I like nearly dead coins.

So is anybody interested in selling some i0?

I need about a week to get the money but I would like to buy at least 100,000 coins.

Please send me a PM if you're interested.

Cheers!

[markm]

Vircurex screwed up, yeah. I0Coin is not dead, but the last bitcoins I sent to Vircurex, back in January or February, have still not arrived there and they still have not responded to emails about it.

I cancelled all my IXCoin and I0Coin offers there butmy last withdraw of I0Coins from there failed and who knows if they will fix that before they remove the withdraw option? So it looks likely they plan to steal I0Coins though dunno where they plan to seel the stolen coins.

Both I0Coin and IXCoin were on long term rise until Vircutrex screwed them both by preventing deposit of bitcoins with which to buy the coins.

I am still trying to get the latest versions of Open Transactions working so I can get my Open Transactions server accessible to folks again without their having to already have an ancient version on their systems, I am also looking into a so called distributed exchange system, which should work with I0Coin (though maybe not IXCoin) because I0Coin supports multi-signature addresses.

I was paying over 10,000 satoshis per coin for I0Coins and IXCoins by the time vircurex decided to screw them by not letting me deposit bitcoins to buy them with, how much were you thinking of paying for I0Coins?

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

Well, IXC is still highly secured and actively trading and it's at 6,000 sat.

Given the higher risk and no active trading for i0 I was thinking half the IXC bid would be fair market price so around 3,000 sat.

If i can get the money I'll be more flexible cause right now I own ZERO coins and I feel like I should own some.

Let me know...

[BitcoinNational]

"New Ixcoin fork -> I0coin"
is it still new?