[ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"

[liie888coins]

Any idea why this might be happening?

Watch the debug.log - it probably tells you something like:

2015-05-13 07:00:58 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : not enough fees 22f5cf1835d3f2135d10e460af30eb7ccd6329f0cf9f40a730b0726fe76964e2, 10000 < 20000

or:

2015-04-30 16:19:31 CWallet::CreateTransaction failed: transaction too big (104430 >= 100000)

Thanks!

Code:

ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : not enough fees 02ce86ccb2dcce0841410b4e243363aa80c7aa5978572f9529074eade0040f75, 0 < 10000

I usually use the following to determine fees:

Code:

Calculating Fee: 
Vout_Count = 50
  Debug: estimated transaction size: 9042 bytes (fee required at 10000 bytes or more)
tx_size_ok = 1
  Debug: transaction priority: 238.31M (fee required at 57.6M or less)
sugg_fee = 0

I even tried forcing a small fee but the transaction still failed.

So how can I calculate the required fee?

I use this in a shell script I wrote once:

    fee=$((($(eval $sign | wc -c) / 2 + 999) / 1000))

ie. sign the transaction, count the characters in the hex string, halve it to get the size in bytes, and round up to a multiple of 1000. Then I use 0.0001*$fee as the fee.

Of course, changing the fee requires you to re-sign the transaction, which can cause the length to change a little (since each input is signed separately, and the length of each signature can increase or decrease by one byte). So to by on the safe side you might want to add 999 + number_of_inputs in there, not just 999. Or just iterate on failure, recalculating the fee from the signed tx length until it succeeds.

Edit: CLAM doesn't have fee-free transactions, I don't think. Every transaction has to include a fee of 0.0001 per 1000 bytes or part thereof. So that's where you're going wrong. I'm not sure whether this is a hard rule (enforced on received transactions and/or blocks) or simply enforced by the client before it will transmit a transaction. Maybe you could modify your local client code to have it send zero-fee transactions and have the network accept them. I never looked into that.

Edit2: I decided to experiment with a zero-fee transaction.

First off, AcceptToMemoryPool() does this check:

Code:

        int64_t txMinFee = GetMinFee(tx, 1000, GMF_RELAY, nSize);
        if ((fLimitFree && nFees < txMinFee) || (!fLimitFree && nFees < MIN_TX_FEE))
            return error("AcceptToMemoryPool : not enough fees %s, %d < %d",
                         hash.ToString(),
                         nFees, txMinFee);

That's where the error you saw came from.

Removing that check isn't enough. You just get a different error:

    2015-05-13 16:37:44 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : ConnectInputs failed c2287daabc7a7b86b723a6c791932fe89371c7c1e8d0cabeb1f4078dcbcda131

That's coming from ConnectInputs() which does this check:

Code:

            // enforce transaction fees for every block
            int64_t nRequiredFee = GetMinFee(*this);
            if (nTxFee < nRequiredFee)
                return fBlock? DoS(100, error("ConnectInputs() : %s not paying required fee=%s, paid=%s", GetHash().ToString(), FormatMoney(nRequiredFee), FormatMoney(nTxFee))) : false;

Removing that check too allows me to send a transaction with no fees:

Code:

$ cc sendrawtransaction $(cc signrawtransaction $(cc createrawtransaction '[{"txid":"951c5cebf8b04a8251f8617331e797a003e52daebdde9670381979e418b8e5cd","vout":1}]' '{"xW42Nau4hpdSu5931gaRHgx6B2ah3WpEvX":{"count":1,"amount":0.25}}') | grep hex | cut -d'"' -f4)
e812bf578bbc0157ac3fd0ed90e0634537d846b50ea71223391739a9ed55f54d

But checking on other nodes in the network, the transaction was either never seen, or seen and rejected with this error message:

Code:

2015-05-13 16:42:55 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : not enough fees e812bf578bbc0157ac3fd0ed90e0634537d846b50ea71223391739a9ed55f54d, 0 < 10000

So maybe if I staked the block myself it would be accepted? To do that I need to run with -mintxfee=0 otherwise my node won't try to include the zero-fee transaction in the blocks it stakes:

Code:

            // Skip free transactions if we're past the minimum block size:
            if (fSortedByFee && (dFeePerKb < nMinTxFee) && (nBlockSize + nTxSize >= nBlockMinSize))
                continue;

Then there was another check for fee size in the miner code, so I commented that out too:

Code:

            int64_t nTxFees = tx.GetValueIn(mapInputs)-tx.GetValueOut();
            if (nTxFees < nMinFee)
                continue;

Finally I managed to stake my zero-fee transaction into a block. When the block was sent to a standard node, it rejected it:

Code:

2015-05-13 18:12:13 ERROR: ConnectInputs() : e812bf578bbc0157ac3fd0ed90e0634537d846b50ea71223391739a9ed55f54d not paying required fee=0.0001, paid=0.00
2015-05-13 18:12:13 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=0c4d66dc6fb8ff9bec6c9e26f12feddec1e3adb6a6f041b309b4947b02bfbc52  height=465778  trust=35361372754116997652  blocktrust=188138013378102  date=05/13/15 18:12:16
2015-05-13 18:12:13 InvalidChainFound:  current best=85b33a65171b31060c66516d5c51c04149e39434eca3a8389e39eb60bd8ab779  height=465777  trust=35361184616103619550  blocktrust=188715424952782  date=05/13/15 18:09:52
2015-05-13 18:12:13 ERROR: SetBestChain() : SetBestChainInner failed
2015-05-13 18:12:13 ERROR: AcceptBlock() : AddToBlockIndex failed
2015-05-13 18:12:13 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED

So I guess that answers that question. ConnectInputs() is called both when creating a transaction and when checking the transactions in received blocks, and it rejects transactions which don't have enough fees.

I was worried I would have to reindex my blockchain on the node that staked the invalid block to get it to continue staking from a valid block, but it turned out I didn't need to. The rest of the network carried on staking from the last valid block, generated a longer chain than my invalid chain, and my node switched to that longer chain, orphaning the invalid block containing the zero-fee transaction.

Why not just update the client to allow conditional zero-fee transactions, just like BTC, LTC and DOGE which CLAM was originated from?

BTC, LTC and DOGE codes all allow nMinFee = 0 if the transaction priority is over 57.6M. It is disappointing we cannot do the same on CLAM network.

[1714846501]

1714846501

[1714846501]

1714846501

[1714846501]

1714846501

[1714846501]

1714846501

[dooglus]

Why not just update the client to allow conditional zero-fee transactions, just like BTC, LTC and DOGE which CLAM was originated from?

BTC, LTC and DOGE codes all allow nMinFee = 0 if the transaction priority is over 57.6M. It is disappointing we cannot do the same on CLAM network.

It would mean making a hard-fork, and everyone would have to upgrade. It doesn't seem worth it just to save a tiny fraction of a CLAM. The fee (0.0001 CLAM per kB) is worth about a hundredth of a US cent.

[chilly2k]

   Quick question.  For staking purposes, would it be better to have all outputs tied to one address, or does it not matter.  What if you had 100 clams divided into 4 clam outputs.  so 25 outputs all tied to one address, or 25 different addresses. 

[dooglus]

Quick question.  For staking purposes, would it be better to have all outputs tied to one address, or does it not matter.  What if you had 100 clams divided into 4 clam outputs.  so 25 outputs all tied to one address, or 25 different addresses. 

It doesn't matter at all.

Staking works on outputs, not addresses.

[chilly2k]

Quick question.  For staking purposes, would it be better to have all outputs tied to one address, or does it not matter.  What if you had 100 clams divided into 4 clam outputs.  so 25 outputs all tied to one address, or 25 different addresses. 

It doesn't matter at all.

Staking works on outputs, not addresses.

   I'm getting myself more and more confused.  Since the odds of staking are based the number of coins.  Some where that has to tie in.  Are larger outputs more likely to stake then smaller output?  I would guess yes?  But I could be wrong.  If that's the case then making my output's larger should give them more of a chance to stake more regularly. 

    Conversely,  if all outputs are equal then more output's equals more of a chance to stake.  So I could divide the output's up into smaller unit's assuming I have enough CPU power to hash them all.   
 
   My staking is all over the board.  From 1 per day to 10 and everything in between.  This is with 2.1K in my wallet. 

[dooglus]

   I'm getting myself more and more confused.  Since the odds of staking are based the number of coins.  Some where that has to tie in.  Are larger outputs more likely to stake then smaller output?  I would guess yes?  But I could be wrong.  If that's the case then making my output's larger should give them more of a chance to stake more regularly. 

Size is all that matters, once an output is old enough (510 confirmations since last stake, 4 hours since last transaction). Chance of staking is proportional to size in CLAMs.

Making your outputs larger will increase their chance of staking. But you'll presumably have less of them. Two outputs of size 5 each have pretty much the same chance of staking as a single output of size 10.

    Conversely,  if all outputs are equal then more output's equals more of a chance to stake.  So I could divide the output's up into smaller unit's assuming I have enough CPU power to hash them all.   

Let's look at a contrived example:

An output of size 10 when there is 500k trying to stake will have a 1 in 50k chance of staking each minute. That's a probability of 0.00002

If you split that into two outputs of size 5, each one will have a 1 in 100k chance of staking each minute. That's a 0.99999 chance of not staking for each. So the chance that neither will stake in any given minute is 0.99999 squared, ie. 0.9999800001, and so the probability of 1 or more staking is 0.0000199999. You have a very slightly smaller chance of staking by splitting, but you have a very slightly bigger chance of staking twice in the same minute. For all practical purposes your chance hasn't really changed.

The big advantage of splitting is that when you do stake, only 5 of your 10 CLAMs get frozen for 8 hours while the block matures, and the other 5 can carry on staking.

   My staking is all over the board.  From 1 per day to 10 and everything in between.  This is with 2.1K in my wallet. 

I think that's pretty normal. You have 2.1k out of 557320 (current network stake weight according to my client - it's just a guess).

You can expect to stake:

>>> 2.1e3 * 1440 / 557320
5.425967128400201

per day, with pretty high variance. 1 to 10 sounds right.

[dooglus]

Mac fag checking in.  Running 1.4.10 and smooth sailing so far.  Staking and all. 
Curious behaviour as the staking icon goes red more than I've ever seen but I can't
see a problem.

Does it go red for long periods at a time? Long enough that you can hover the mouse over it and tell me what pops up when it's red?

If you put:
debug=stake
in the clam.conf file in the same folder as your wallet.dat and restart, it will write stake-related stuff to debug.log in the same folder as it stakes.

You could "tail -f debug.log" in that folder and see whether anything looks different when it's red. Staking basically consists of hashing each of your staking outputs every 16 seconds and comparing the result with a target based on the network difficulty. If the output hashes lower than the target, you get to stake a block. "debug=stake" will cause these hashes that are being compared to be logged.

I couldn't find an existing one, so I created a clam.conf and added debug=stake.  I'm hoping I did it correctly.  I added a screengrab of data flow. http://imgur.com/Gmcfbf8 When I hover the cursor over the red icon, it sometimes says 0 weight.  And then other times it says not staking because I don't have mature coins.  But then I stake at least once a day. 

Hope this helps.  Thanks for everything! 

/s/

Same thing was happening to me on a previous version (1.4.7 i think)  and the 0 weight was also showing.
I haven't seen it happen to me again yet on this latest version.. but I'll watch for it.

It can stay red for up to one minute, i've seen it myself. When you hover over it says 'Not staking because you don't have mature coins'

It doesn't appear to affect staking in the long run, i always just put it down to new blocks being generated and that it was a normal thing.

I have the debug switch on at the moment so i'll try and upload the debug.log next time i see it happen.

So I forgot about this issue until whiskey brought it up again today in the Just-Dice chat. I don't use the QT interface myself, so it was easy to forget about.

I finally found and fixed the bug. It was just a display issue. See https://github.com/nochowderforyou/clams/issues/188 for details.

It will be fixed in the next release of the CLAM client.

[SuperClam]

So I forgot about this issue until whiskey brought it up again today in the Just-Dice chat. I don't use the QT interface myself, so it was easy to forget about.
I finally found and fixed the bug. It was just a display issue. See https://github.com/nochowderforyou/clams/issues/188 for details.
It will be fixed in the next release of the CLAM client.

A simple fix; but it fixes a thorn that has been re-occurring for sometime.

Nice job, dooglus.

[SuperClam]

There has been some intention of re-branding CLAMs for quite a while.
Art/Media assets, website, client, etc. could use a more professional and memorable image.

Does anyone have any opinions, ideas, or thoughts on the matter?

[BayAreaCoins]

There has been some intention of re-branding CLAMs for quite a while.
Art/Media assets, website, client, etc. could use a more professional and memorable image.

Does anyone have any opinions, ideas, or thoughts on the matter?

At least 3 different parties think they are going to redo y'alls website. Is it possible to open source it maybe?

I know at least Dandi and V1rt were under the impression they where going to work on it.

People can see an example of what Dandi can do at www.Clamcoin.org.  I haven't seen any of v1rts work ever.

I don't think Clamcoin.org is perfect, but I do believe it is a cleaner lay out ect.  I also like the domain name WAY more.  Not interested in removing the Google ads.  We do link your site however and I know Dandi is fine if you use the sites lay out on ClamClient.com, but remove the Google ads.  If you chose to do that it'd be cool if you reference Clamcoin.org as where you got it from since we are reference you as the official site.

The problem with Clamclient is that no one remembers "client" (at least at this point.)  Hell, I even have to think a little to remember it. I do understand the reasoning behind idea behind it.

[dooglus]

I collected together the changes since the last release, tagged a new release, and put together the release notes:



xploited is taking a look at it, so hopefully binaries will be available soon.

It won't be a mandatory upgrade. There's nothing that forks the chain in it.

The most notable new feature is that you will now be able to split your balance into multiple pieces quickly and easily without resorting to using raw transactions.

Example:

Code:

$ clamd sendtoaddress x8V54PeNc8sS8ZuFEAgFXi6y11UfFu7ryv '{"amount":25,"count":31}'
7676517f5584d173a558a55e400c484c1aa05a77d8abfccafc908ac3aa3f822c

That sent 31 separate outputs of size 25 CLAM to a single address, and sent change to a new address, as always. It sets the fee automatically too:

[cryptothreads]

Hello Clams!

Does anyone have any clam media assets like logos I could use ? , or can point me to them. If not, someone PM who knows how to design around CLAM.  Thanks!

[ethought]

So I guess that answers that question. ConnectInputs() is called both when creating a transaction and when checking the transactions in received blocks, and it rejects transactions which don't have enough fees.

Thanks Dooglus - I got it working by adding a fee of 0.001 CLAM. Even after cleaning up around 7000 dust transactions in 150 or so transactions it only cost 0.15 CLAM.

[garthkiser]

Hello Clams!

Does anyone have any clam media assets like logos I could use ? , or can point me to them. If not, someone PM who knows how to design around CLAM.  Thanks!

Here's a .ai of the CLAMs logo: https://www.dropbox.com/s/szhly00g5eun7l0/clamLogo%20%281%29.ai?dl=0

[tobeaj2mer01]

How can I claim CLAM if I have a bitcoin wallet or private key?

[garthkiser]

How can I claim CLAM if I have a bitcoin wallet or private key?

The bitcoin wallet can be imported within the CLAMclient like this: http://clamclient.com/#/import

To import a private key, you can type this into the debug window: importprivkey yourprivatekey
Like this: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/5941/how-do-i-import-a-private-key-into-bitcoin-qt

[dooglus]

Probably related to the "double-spend" issue I reported on the last page, visiting:
  http://clamsight.com/address/x8Smd9f7FPDKts2Rfd33kvouJcgoJ5BrHg
seems to hang when loading transactions. I never see any of the 8 transactions it claims exist on that address.

Edit: would it be possible to have khashier back as an alternative block explorer? It's the only vaguely functional block explorer for CLAM I knew of, and now it forwards to CLAMsight, which while being a whole lot prettier than khashier is also a whole lot more broken in various ways.

Of the two, khashier was much more useful when I actually needed to explore the blockchain.

[dooglus]

In what order does clamsight list the transactions for an address?

http://clamsight.com/address/x8Smd9f7FPDKts2Rfd33kvouJcgoJ5BrHg is loading for me now, but the first three transactions listed have 109, 7077, and 5489 confirmations, in that order. The oldest of the three transactions is in the middle. Seems like a strange way of doing things:

[SuperClam]

Probably related to the "double-spend" issue I reported on the last page, visiting:
  http://clamsight.com/address/x8Smd9f7FPDKts2Rfd33kvouJcgoJ5BrHg
seems to hang when loading transactions. I never see any of the 8 transactions it claims exist on that address.
Edit: would it be possible to have khashier back as an alternative block explorer? It's the only vaguely functional block explorer for CLAM I knew of, and now it forwards to CLAMsight, which while being a whole lot prettier than khashier is also a whole lot more broken in various ways.
Of the two, khashier was much more useful when I actually needed to explore the blockchain.

Khashier was redirected to clamsight to preserve search engine indexes.
It may take a little while to get it set up, but I see no reason that khashier could not be operated as well.


- Added a notice to users concerning the recent requirement of First/Last Name and Country of Origin to use the Poloniex platform.
- Margin trading added to Poloniex - Please request that they add CLAM to the margin trading platform!

[ethought]

CLAMS has been added to blocktree.io block explorer

http://www.blocktree.io/e/CLAM

Rich List: http://www.blocktree.io/richlist/CLAM

Donations Welcome to:

xKKcMtFTnfZwggUWoL3eZ3d3groVwqqRn8