Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 10:09:17 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 [171] 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 ... 232 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Armory - Discussion Thread  (Read 481553 times)
kentt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 05:10:52 PM
 #3401

In that particular thread that is linked, we have a problem with certain types of transactions that is affecting at least 2 of the 3 users there reporting issues (which are in this thread).  I suspect this pattern is present across a lot of support requests.   I whole-heartedly agree that we need to get the app working for those users, but they still represent a small portion of our userbase -- those that are participating in pooled mining. 
It's not the userbase the participates in certain types of pooled mining that is the issue.  The issue is that Armory won't work for some typical transactions (one input, lots of output addresses).  There are many applications of this and it will only be more common.
Sorry for being so adversarial today. I like what you guys are doing.
1480802957
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802957

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802957
Reply with quote  #2

1480802957
Report to moderator
1480802957
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802957

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802957
Reply with quote  #2

1480802957
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480802957
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802957

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802957
Reply with quote  #2

1480802957
Report to moderator
1480802957
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802957

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802957
Reply with quote  #2

1480802957
Report to moderator
1480802957
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802957

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802957
Reply with quote  #2

1480802957
Report to moderator
Zoella
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 05:12:59 PM
 #3402

Armory reporting 9 minutes left to scan. Crossing my fingers!!! Will update soon.

Sad No love with 3-beta.

Trying to see if the disable comments fix will resolve the sweep issue now. Will report back in about 45 minutes or so.
Zoella
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 05:15:25 PM
 #3403

<snip>
2. Not sending pooled funds into Armory.  I send them every once in a while when it's as much as feel comfortable leaving in a web wallet.
<snip>

Unfortunately this won't work on many switching pools. Middlecoin and WafflePool both payout on a daily basis. You can't hold it. These are the two primary pools that I believe are killing my wallets.
etotheipi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


Core Armory Developer


View Profile WWW
March 19, 2014, 05:17:27 PM
 #3404

Armory reporting 9 minutes left to scan. Crossing my fingers!!! Will update soon.

Sad No love with 3-beta.

Trying to see if the disable comments fix will resolve the sweep issue now. Will report back in about 45 minutes or so.

So there may be no short-term solution for 0.91-beta for these types of wallets.  We will move forward with 0.91 as-is, and plan to get a wallet with lots of these transactions and fix this issue in a point-release, 0.91.1.

Founder and CEO of Armory Technologies, Inc.
Armory Bitcoin Wallet: Bringing cold storage to the average user!
Only use Armory software signed by the Armory Offline Signing Key (0x98832223)

Please donate to the Armory project by clicking here!    (or donate directly via 1QBDLYTDFHHZAABYSKGKPWKLSXZWCCJQBX -- yes, it's a real address!)
Zoella
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 05:35:23 PM
 #3405

Armory reporting 9 minutes left to scan. Crossing my fingers!!! Will update soon.

Sad No love with 3-beta.

Trying to see if the disable comments fix will resolve the sweep issue now. Will report back in about 45 minutes or so.

So there may be no short-term solution for 0.91-beta for these types of wallets.  We will move forward with 0.91 as-is, and plan to get a wallet with lots of these transactions and fix this issue in a point-release, 0.91.1.

Personally I think the bootstrap is a significant enough upgrade to warrant a release. Great feature. I'll have an update on the sweep operation in a little bit. I really hope this works so that I can empty the wallet and send it to you for testing. If not, I'll send you a watching only version.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
March 19, 2014, 05:44:37 PM
 #3406

0.91 is an improvement over 0.90 for sure.  But we don't believe that it's a critical upgrade.
I'm eating lunch with altoz right now and he also says he's had problems with 0.90 that required him to delete the .armory directory.

I think you've got a lot of users who having problem but are just living with them instead of reporting them.
Finnminer
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 74


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 05:49:20 PM
 #3407

In that particular thread that is linked, we have a problem with certain types of transactions that is affecting at least 2 of the 3 users there reporting issues (which are in this thread).  I suspect this pattern is present across a lot of support requests.   I whole-heartedly agree that we need to get the app working for those users, but they still represent a small portion of our userbase -- those that are participating in pooled mining. 
I might be one of those users. But I've had a lots of other problems too. For example a fresh install will crash at least a couple of times during the initial scanning even with no wallets added. I've had various problems on 2 different Windows computers and one Ubuntu.

I haven't reported any issues before because until now Armory has been able to run at least a few minutes before crashing allowing me to do the transaction. Now I'm at a point where I can't even do that, because any version I try will crash before I can do anything.

My offline Armory has always worked flawlessly though.
kentt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 07:01:21 PM
 #3408

<snip>
2. Not sending pooled funds into Armory.  I send them every once in a while when it's as much as feel comfortable leaving in a web wallet.
<snip>

Unfortunately this won't work on many switching pools. Middlecoin and WafflePool both payout on a daily basis. You can't hold it. These are the two primary pools that I believe are killing my wallets.
I didn't explain well enough.  What I meant is I use blockchain.info for wafflepool daily payments.  After a couple weeks then I send them to armory.  I didn't mean that I delay the payout.
It worked for me and it sounds like we mine on the same pools.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 07:05:06 PM
 #3409

0.91 is an improvement over 0.90 for sure.  But we don't believe that it's a critical upgrade.
I'm eating lunch with altoz right now and he also says he's had problems with 0.90 that required him to delete the .armory directory.

I think you've got a lot of users who having problem but are just living with them instead of reporting them.

i have had zero problems with 0.90 (zero crashes) and that's after putting it thru heavy testing.

of course, my laptop has 16GB RAM with a huge HD in linux.
Zoella
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 07:29:22 PM
 #3410

<snip>
2. Not sending pooled funds into Armory.  I send them every once in a while when it's as much as feel comfortable leaving in a web wallet.
<snip>

Unfortunately this won't work on many switching pools. Middlecoin and WafflePool both payout on a daily basis. You can't hold it. These are the two primary pools that I believe are killing my wallets.
I didn't explain well enough.  What I meant is I use blockchain.info for wafflepool daily payments.  After a couple weeks then I send them to armory.  I didn't mean that I delay the payout.
It worked for me and it sounds like we mine on the same pools.

Ahh, gotcha. An intermediate wallet would make sense.
Ente
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 08:29:39 PM
 #3411

I have 0.90 installed for ages (it feels). Never a single problem, no crash, no rescan, nothing. Works like a charm here on Debian.

Ente
bitcoin.newsfeed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 08:37:45 PM
 #3412

I have 0.90 installed for ages (it feels). Never a single problem, no crash, no rescan, nothing. Works like a charm here on Debian.

Ente

Same here ... btw, do I need to update something now, when qt 0.9 is out?

... Question Everything, Believe Nothing ...
kentt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 09:10:44 PM
 #3413

0.91 is an improvement over 0.90 for sure.  But we don't believe that it's a critical upgrade.
I'm eating lunch with altoz right now and he also says he's had problems with 0.90 that required him to delete the .armory directory.

I think you've got a lot of users who having problem but are just living with them instead of reporting them.

i have had zero problems with 0.90 (zero crashes) and that's after putting it thru heavy testing.

of course, my laptop has 16GB RAM with a huge HD in linux.
Heavy testing?  Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f

I couldn't on any rig.
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1316

Armory Developer


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 09:17:39 PM
 #3414

0.91 is an improvement over 0.90 for sure.  But we don't believe that it's a critical upgrade.
I'm eating lunch with altoz right now and he also says he's had problems with 0.90 that required him to delete the .armory directory.

I think you've got a lot of users who having problem but are just living with them instead of reporting them.

i have had zero problems with 0.90 (zero crashes) and that's after putting it thru heavy testing.

of course, my laptop has 16GB RAM with a huge HD in linux.
Heavy testing?  Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f

I couldn't on any rig.

These are the typical transaction that we identified bring Armory to a crawl, we're building a test case to identify possible inefficiencies. Worst case scenario we'll have to overhaul that part.

btcarmory.com
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1316

Armory Developer


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 09:18:17 PM
 #3415

I have 0.90 installed for ages (it feels). Never a single problem, no crash, no rescan, nothing. Works like a charm here on Debian.

Ente

Same here ... btw, do I need to update something now, when qt 0.9 is out?

No you don't. It's preferable that you do but 0.90 is compatible with bitcoin core 0.9.0

btcarmory.com
etotheipi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


Core Armory Developer


View Profile WWW
March 19, 2014, 09:22:06 PM
 #3416

Heavy testing?  Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f

I couldn't on any rig.

The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed.  However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports.  Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it.  Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.

Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant.  I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems.  Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1.  Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.

Founder and CEO of Armory Technologies, Inc.
Armory Bitcoin Wallet: Bringing cold storage to the average user!
Only use Armory software signed by the Armory Offline Signing Key (0x98832223)

Please donate to the Armory project by clicking here!    (or donate directly via 1QBDLYTDFHHZAABYSKGKPWKLSXZWCCJQBX -- yes, it's a real address!)
Zoella
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 09:40:29 PM
 #3417

Heavy testing?  Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f

I couldn't on any rig.

The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed.  However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports.  Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it.  Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.

Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant.  I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems.  Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1.  Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.

Do you still need a watching only wallet? I've transferred everything out of mine and plan to retire it. Let me know how to send one if you need it.
MaxwellsDemon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 187

Converting information into power since 1867


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 09:58:56 PM
 #3418

Same here ... btw, do I need to update something now, when qt 0.9 is out?

No you don't. It's preferable that you do but 0.90 is compatible with bitcoin core 0.9.0

Just one tiny thing: Armory doesn't seem to find the daemon after installing core 0.9.0. Had to manually point it at Bitcoin\daemon.

We're hunting for Leviathan, and Bitcoin is our harpoon.
etotheipi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


Core Armory Developer


View Profile WWW
March 19, 2014, 10:03:29 PM
 #3419

Heavy testing?  Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f

I couldn't on any rig.

The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed.  However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports.  Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it.  Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.

Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant.  I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems.  Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1.  Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.

Do you still need a watching only wallet? I've transferred everything out of mine and plan to retire it. Let me know how to send one if you need it.

Absolutely.  Without it we'll have to manually hack together a wallet that exhibits the problem.  It would be much easier if we had one we already know causes problems. 

FYI we're stirring up our support email channel, so I'm not sure if a simple email with attachment will work.  Please try it and we'll find another way to get it if doesn't work (just support at bitcoinarmory dot com).

Founder and CEO of Armory Technologies, Inc.
Armory Bitcoin Wallet: Bringing cold storage to the average user!
Only use Armory software signed by the Armory Offline Signing Key (0x98832223)

Please donate to the Armory project by clicking here!    (or donate directly via 1QBDLYTDFHHZAABYSKGKPWKLSXZWCCJQBX -- yes, it's a real address!)
kentt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 10:08:56 PM
 #3420

The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed.  However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports.  Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it.  Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.

Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant.  I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems.  Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1.  Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.
Okay great.  I hadn't realized that you had accepted this as the issue.  It sounds like you've got a handle on the issue.
Thanks.
Pages: « 1 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 [171] 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 ... 232 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!