killerjoegreece
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1007
Professional Native Greek Translator (2000+ done)
|
|
May 09, 2016, 09:24:33 PM |
|
maybe the amount is too high?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
May 09, 2016, 09:41:01 PM |
|
maybe the amount is too high? What amount? I didn't communicate with the daemon. It just spit this out by itself.
|
|
|
|
|
xmrnoob
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
May 28, 2016, 01:24:56 PM |
|
bitmonerod is spewing stuff like this every 10s or so:
ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:25:07.443042 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:25:34.447733 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {4} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:26:14.299694 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:26:46.632806 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {6} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:27:16.128294 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection
|
|
|
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
May 28, 2016, 07:59:49 PM |
|
How are you inferring that from what I provided? I can't see how that transaction matches the error that I posted at all.
|
|
|
|
|
medusa13
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 453
Merit: 500
hello world
|
|
May 29, 2016, 05:52:00 AM |
|
bitmonerod is spewing stuff like this every 10s or so:
ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:25:07.443042 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:25:34.447733 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {4} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:26:14.299694 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {8} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:26:46.632806 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection ERROR {6} {p1} 2016-05-28 15:27:16.128294 [abstract_tcp_server2.inl+512 ::do_send_chunk] send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(1000), shutting down connection
this is a known issue and you can savely ignore it. it means one connection can not be shut down correctly, all the other connections of your node are probably fine still. if you get annoyed by it, restart bitmonerod. personally i only get this error on nodes running inside a VM should be this one: https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/issues/661---> will be fixed soon as far as i know
|
XMR Monero
|
|
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
July 14, 2016, 04:28:04 AM |
|
Is there a way to run simplewallet without logging? I get the impression that increasing log-level from the default 0 up through 4 just increases verbosity, with 0 still logging stuff.
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 14, 2016, 04:31:47 AM |
|
Is there a way to run simplewallet without logging? I get the impression that increasing log-level from the default 0 up through 4 just increases verbosity, with 0 still logging stuff.
whats the goal? and what OS? there are various linux hacks you could use perhaps... like logrotate to decrease the size of simplewallet logs, or directing the logfile to the ramdisk thing (there's some mounted folder thats on RAM, so it dies when you turn off computer)... or just a cronjob to delete the .log files in a given directory every whenever. as for straight up no logs... i don't think that exists, but thats definitely something you could put as a feature request on the monero github and it would probably be implemented because its probably really easy to do.
|
|
|
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
July 14, 2016, 08:15:57 AM |
|
Is there a way to run simplewallet without logging? I get the impression that increasing log-level from the default 0 up through 4 just increases verbosity, with 0 still logging stuff.
whats the goal? and what OS? there are various linux hacks you could use perhaps... like logrotate to decrease the size of simplewallet logs, or directing the logfile to the ramdisk thing (there's some mounted folder thats on RAM, so it dies when you turn off computer)... or just a cronjob to delete the .log files in a given directory every whenever. as for straight up no logs... i don't think that exists, but thats definitely something you could put as a feature request on the monero github and it would probably be implemented because its probably really easy to do. Yeah, if I was on Linux, I'd definitely be looking at directing it to /dev/null or the like. I happen to be on Windows, and just figured that if we're suggesting Monero to people as the privacy cryptocurrency, we shouldn't be logging our transaction data or even our public addresses to a plain text file. The less information left around the better when dealing with privacy concerns.
|
|
|
|
c789
|
|
July 15, 2016, 08:46:03 PM |
|
I'm running the 0.9.4 version on Ubuntu 14.04 server64 and simplewallet is running with rpc-bind-port 18082. Are any of these simplewallet error messages something to be concerned about?
2016-Jul-15 16:08:09.822920 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: 492GF1q6jU61RnTWmKVhkjJbjWpD3KZch6EvCWBkurtqRFMYuk3HUgMcv8Wm3pEXwGh44W2yv3rJLf6 Yr17q9aPyTHqR3v6 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.515469 ERROR /DISTRIBUTION-BUILD/src/cryptonote_core/cryptonote_format_utils.cpp:148 max_out exceeded 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813029 Loaded ok 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813380 Binding on 127.0.0.1:18082 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813598 Starting wallet rpc server 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813665 Run net_service loop( 1 threads)... 2016-Jul-15 16:08:30.858449 [RPC0]failed to deserialize extra field. extra = 01b5cb3dffb77997f32c37a7bc5e707af7b6f8faa2b8084777989288eeca3130bfde209fa65f6f5 20854c9635fbbdc7f81dc1874c92fa77bdb423366adbc69e771310c 2016-Jul-15 16:08:30.858606 [RPC0]Transaction extra has unsupported format: <9e714183c6683d67309759108a634fa87dc96406273af89ad1cf18573569d7af>
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 15, 2016, 08:53:14 PM |
|
I'm running the 0.9.4 version on Ubuntu 14.04 server64 and simplewallet is running with rpc-bind-port 18082. Are any of these simplewallet error messages something to be concerned about?
2016-Jul-15 16:08:09.822920 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: 492GF1q6jU61RnTWmKVhkjJbjWpD3KZch6EvCWBkurtqRFMYuk3HUgMcv8Wm3pEXwGh44W2yv3rJLf6 Yr17q9aPyTHqR3v6 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.515469 ERROR /DISTRIBUTION-BUILD/src/cryptonote_core/cryptonote_format_utils.cpp:148 max_out exceeded 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813029 Loaded ok 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813380 Binding on 127.0.0.1:18082 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813598 Starting wallet rpc server 2016-Jul-15 16:08:10.813665 Run net_service loop( 1 threads)... 2016-Jul-15 16:08:30.858449 [RPC0]failed to deserialize extra field. extra = 01b5cb3dffb77997f32c37a7bc5e707af7b6f8faa2b8084777989288eeca3130bfde209fa65f6f5 20854c9635fbbdc7f81dc1874c92fa77bdb423366adbc69e771310c 2016-Jul-15 16:08:30.858606 [RPC0]Transaction extra has unsupported format: <9e714183c6683d67309759108a634fa87dc96406273af89ad1cf18573569d7af>
they are fine (im 99% sure). The max out is a bug thats fixed in current master, and the "extra field" thing is apparently some minergate nonsense. apparently minergate enjoys stamping their payouts with something weird.
|
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
July 17, 2016, 05:16:03 PM |
|
Try the binaries that did get made.
Honestly, I'm growing tired of this answer. Got the same from the dash crowd. Even worse: "blah blah binary download site is the only place where you should get your client" (paraphrased). This is an opensource project and imo it's important that people build from source habitually.
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 17, 2016, 05:51:33 PM |
|
Try the binaries that did get made.
Honestly, I'm growing tired of this answer. Got the same from the dash crowd. Even worse: "blah blah binary download site is the only place where you should get your client" (paraphrased). This is an opensource project and imo it's important that people build from source habitually. dude, I meant the binaries that got made during your compile. When you first commented, there was a bug in unit tests, so the main binaries would compile fine but then there'd be a bunch of errors in the unit tests. Now head on master compiles file without any errors.
|
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
July 17, 2016, 08:08:01 PM |
|
Try the binaries that did get made.
Honestly, I'm growing tired of this answer. Got the same from the dash crowd. Even worse: "blah blah binary download site is the only place where you should get your client" (paraphrased). This is an opensource project and imo it's important that people build from source habitually. dude, I meant the binaries that got made during your compile. When you first commented, there was a bug in unit tests, so the main binaries would compile fine but then there'd be a bunch of errors in the unit tests. Now head on master compiles file without any errors. Try the binaries that did get made.
Honestly, I'm growing tired of this answer. Got the same from the dash crowd. Even worse: "blah blah binary download site is the only place where you should get your client" (paraphrased). This is an opensource project and imo it's important that people build from source habitually. I also never use the binaries and I never recommend anyone to use them. also compiling from source feels good. sorry guys, I both misinterpreted what Gingerale said and also overreacted. Apologees.
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
beaniest
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
July 29, 2016, 09:47:21 AM |
|
Much appreciate your help for the following matter:
I made a SimpleWallet transfer which got stuck in daemon (Pending). I did rescan_bc and balance in SimpleWallet returned to the stage before the transaction.
However now when i try to make a transfer or transfer_new I'm getting "Error: Reason: double spend". How can this be fixed?
Thank you for your help!
|
|
|
|
beaniest
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
July 29, 2016, 11:35:01 AM |
|
Much appreciate your help for the following matter:
I made a SimpleWallet transfer which got stuck in daemon (Pending). I did rescan_bc and balance in SimpleWallet returned to the stage before the transaction.
However now when i try to make a transfer or transfer_new I'm getting "Error: Reason: double spend". How can this be fixed?
Thank you for your help!
Never mind. 5h later it had cleared out with a successful transfer.
|
|
|
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
August 07, 2016, 08:19:08 AM Last edit: August 08, 2016, 02:49:44 AM by mmortal03 |
|
Was simplewallet --restore-deterministic-wallet, or something related to the following issue, broken in the master as of at least a month ago? I happened to build from the master back on July 10th and I just tried using it to restore a paper wallet, and it gave me a balance of zero. I refreshed, but it still showed a zero balance. I did a rescan_bc, and I noticed it scanned absurdly quickly compared to what I'm used to, but still displayed a zero balance. So, I went back to simplewallet from 0.9.4.0, and after letting it scan from scratch, the correct balance was shown.
Edit: I've just compiled from the latest master, and the problem persists. The scanning from scratch simply doesn't seem to detect any inputs or outputs.
|
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
August 11, 2016, 07:40:56 PM |
|
it takes a while for your nodes presence to be detected on the network. Basically, nodes that connect to you (node A) say "oh hai, now I now you exist, I'm going to write down your number". And then when that node connects to another node (node B), the node B says "hey, how many nodes do you know?" and node A goes "here's my list. They're cool people". And node B goes "ok thanks bye." And then node C connects to node B and goes "yo I needs some nodes to connect to" and node B goes "Oh I gots a list". So who knows where monerohash.com is on this list of sharing in relation to your node. It will take a while, but you're on there. Make sure your ports are open too. Check your firewalls and open 18080
|
|
|
|
|