Pieter Wuille
|
|
March 10, 2012, 10:20:36 PM |
|
Anyone who used 0.6.0rc1, got stuck on block 170059, upgraded to 0.6.0rc2, and is still stuck: can you please contact me?
I have implemented a potential fix for this problem, but it is hard to find test cases.
Thank you.
|
I do Bitcoin stuff.
|
|
|
Pieter Wuille
|
|
March 11, 2012, 02:11:27 AM |
|
Anyone who used 0.6.0rc1, got stuck on block 170059, upgraded to 0.6.0rc2, and is still stuck: can you please contact me?
I have implemented a potential fix for this problem, but it is hard to find test cases.
Thanks to mcorlett and kish for helping. It seems my fix works.
|
I do Bitcoin stuff.
|
|
|
br00t
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 16
Merit: 0
|
|
March 11, 2012, 08:17:31 PM |
|
v0.6.0rc2 built from master branch still stuck at block 170059 :-( Tried -rescan and -paytoscripthashtime ... any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
mcorlett
Donator
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
|
|
March 11, 2012, 08:21:51 PM |
|
v0.6.0rc2 built from master branch still stuck at block 170059 :-( Tried -rescan and -paytoscripthashtime ... any thoughts?
Pieter instructed me to run his minireorg branch, and it seems to be working. I assume it's this commit. It has also been made into a pull request for the mainline client: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/930.
|
|
|
|
br00t
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 16
Merit: 0
|
|
March 11, 2012, 08:29:55 PM |
|
Thanks mcorlett I'll give it a try...
|
|
|
|
deepceleron
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1036
|
|
March 12, 2012, 02:28:17 AM Last edit: March 12, 2012, 02:45:42 AM by deepceleron |
|
I fired up 0.6rc1 after a week, and got the same problem, stuck at 170059, also with the "WARNING: Displayed transactions may not be correct!" Reinstalling bitcoin-0.5.2 over it did not fix the problem, so whatever problem it had is left behind in the wallet or blockchain. I'll replace the blockchain with my block 165000 download and see if it gets past, otherwise we've got a wallet problem. So this transaction messed up everybody then?: http://blockexplorer.com/tx/6a26d2ecb67f27d1fa5524763b49029d7106e91e3cc05743073461a719776192We basically got a in-the-wild example of this?: The problem [as I understand it] is if somebody purposely creates a transaction that is valid under the old rules, invalid under the new ones. If an old client creates a block with that transaction, the majority of the network will not acknowledge it because of the invalid transaction, so eventually the network will orphan that block with one that does not contain the invalid transaction.
My debug.log (paste) when errors start in 0.6rc1 received block 000000000000047e131d SetBestChain: new best=000000000000047e131d height=170058 work=256371172561403830047 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED received block 00000000000003bd2bf5 SetBestChain: new best=00000000000003bd2bf5 height=170059 work=256377602133619763100 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED received block 00000000000002dc756e ERROR: ConnectInputs() : 6a26d2ecb6 VerifySignature failed InvalidChainFound: invalid block=00000000000002dc756e height=170060 work=256384031705835696153 InvalidChainFound: current best=00000000000003bd2bf5 height=170059 work=256377602133619763100 ERROR: SetBestChain() : ConnectBlock failed ERROR: AcceptBlock() : AddToBlockIndex failed ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED received block 0000000000000abd377c REORGANIZE ERROR: ConnectInputs() : 6a26d2ecb6 VerifySignature failed ERROR: Reorganize() : ConnectBlock failed InvalidChainFound: invalid block=0000000000000abd377c height=170061 work=256390461278051629206 InvalidChainFound: current best=00000000000003bd2bf5 height=170059 work=256377602133619763100 ERROR: SetBestChain() : Reorganize failed ERROR: AcceptBlock() : AddToBlockIndex failed ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED Error fun from reverting to 0.5.2 askfor tx acb6e1fa6b8e3d0ab5d7 0 sending getdata: tx acb6e1fa6b8e3d0ab5d7 ERROR: ConnectInputs() : acb6e1fa6b mapTransactions prev not found 0c76b20c0e ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed acb6e1fa6b storing orphan tx acb6e1fa6b askfor tx 65ec6b3d1f63bd125040 0 sending getdata: tx 65ec6b3d1f63bd125040 AcceptToMemoryPool(): accepted 65ec6b3d1f askfor tx d6b2b4c5b4fe3f9f6b58 0 sending getdata: tx d6b2b4c5b4fe3f9f6b58 ERROR: ConnectInputs() : d6b2b4c5b4 mapTransactions prev not found e24d802c1a ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed d6b2b4c5b4 storing orphan tx d6b2b4c5b4
|
|
|
|
Pieter Wuille
|
|
March 12, 2012, 04:42:55 AM Last edit: March 12, 2012, 05:25:27 AM by Pieter Wuille |
|
That is exactly what happened.
Someone mined an invalid BIP16 transaction in block 170060. However, BIP16 was delayed by one month, so to anyone running something before or after 0.6.0rc1, the transaction was just a weird but valid spend-to-hash. For users of 0.6.0rc1, it was an invalid spend.
If you had run 0.6.0rc1 for a long time, your database would contain a very long apparently-invalid chain. When upgrading or downgrading, that chain suddenly becomes valid, and a huge reorganization is attempted. However, apparently this is such a massive database operation that many users hit some arbitrary limits in the database library.
|
I do Bitcoin stuff.
|
|
|
deepceleron
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1036
|
|
March 12, 2012, 11:09:53 AM |
|
I fired up 0.6rc1 after a week, and got the same problem, stuck at 170059, also with the "WARNING: Displayed transactions may not be correct!" Reinstalling bitcoin-0.5.2 over it did not fix the problem, so whatever problem it had is left behind in the wallet or blockchain. I'll replace the blockchain with my block 165000 download and see if it gets past, otherwise we've got a wallet problem. The blockchain replacement and resync with 0.5.2 worked. Maybe restarting worked right after this block, but yes, it looks like 0.5.2 can't deal after hundreds more blocks that were "invalid" are in the blockchain db and do a reorg starting back that far. Looks like we have a bugfix for 0.5.3?
|
|
|
|
tsupp4
|
|
March 12, 2012, 07:38:06 PM |
|
I fired up 0.6rc1 after a week, and got the same problem, stuck at 170059, also with the "WARNING: Displayed transactions may not be correct!" Reinstalling bitcoin-0.5.2 over it did not fix the problem, so whatever problem it had is left behind in the wallet or blockchain. I'll replace the blockchain with my block 165000 download and see if it gets past, otherwise we've got a wallet problem. The blockchain replacement and resync with 0.5.2 worked. Maybe restarting worked right after this block, but yes, it looks like 0.5.2 can't deal after hundreds more blocks that were "invalid" are in the blockchain db and do a reorg starting back that far. Looks like we have a bugfix for 0.5.3? Thank you for this solution.
|
"It's not rich who got much, but who gives much."
|
|
|
Ferroh
Member
Offline
Activity: 111
Merit: 100
|
|
March 21, 2012, 04:45:49 AM |
|
Sadly I am using rc4 and I am still stuck at 170059.
|
|
|
|
Aggro
Donator
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 296
Merit: 250
|
|
March 27, 2012, 05:25:09 PM |
|
We just started testing rc5 and noticed the following:
When you try to import a private key into an encrypted wallet that hasn't been unlocked, you receive the following error:
error: {"code":-4,"message":"Error adding key to wallet"}
I believe that the message that should be returned is that the wallet needs to be unlocked, similarly than when you try to use sendtoaddress without unlocking the wallet. I tried the same private key with the wallet unlocked and the import was successful.
So far everything works great. I am still downloading the blockchain and will report if it gets stuck.
Thanks! Roberto
|
|
|
|
bitcoinsarefun
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
March 28, 2012, 01:19:25 PM |
|
is 0.6.0 still on track for release today?
|
|
|
|
Diapolo
|
|
March 28, 2012, 01:24:57 PM |
|
is 0.6.0 still on track for release today?
At least there were no new commits merged on github, but that is no definite answer for your question, sorry. Dia
|
|
|
|
Gavin Andresen (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2301
Chief Scientist
|
|
March 28, 2012, 04:55:52 PM |
|
is 0.6.0 still on track for release today?
We might re-spin the release with just updated translations. There is one serious issue affecting a few people ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74447.0) but because it is a one-time problem when you upgrade from an older release and has a pretty simple workaround (remove your addr.dat file and re-run), we may release with it as a Known Issue. If there are any Berkeley DB database experts reading this we could use your help figuring out what the heck is going on...
|
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
redditorrex
|
|
April 28, 2012, 07:18:05 PM |
|
Hey, I just grabbed the master from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin and just hit this wall. I cant bring any new nodes online, all my trees stop at 170 also.
|
Reddit Mining Team - MtRed.com = Pure PPS + #00GH/s + LP(+) + AutoPay&InstaPay + Audio Notifications Find us in #mtred @ irc.freenode.net
|
|
|
|