[Ultracoin] [Est. Feb 2014] ~ ASIC Resistant & Ultrafast 6 Second Transactions!

[WWC-DEV]

Is ultrabex working, I seem to get different amount there than in my actual wallet, don't seem to be updating on ultrabex

Seems to be about 7 days behind - don't think its been re-synced since the latest fork

did you try the latest version?

[1714132265]

1714132265

[1714132265]

1714132265

[1714132265]

1714132265

[usukan]

Is ultrabex working, I seem to get different amount there than in my actual wallet, don't seem to be updating on ultrabex

Seems to be about 7 days behind - don't think its been re-synced since the latest fork

did you try the latest version?

whats the link to the latest version?

[WWC-DEV]

Is ultrabex working, I seem to get different amount there than in my actual wallet, don't seem to be updating on ultrabex

Seems to be about 7 days behind - don't think its been re-synced since the latest fork

did you try the latest version?

whats the link to the latest version?

http://www.tumblingblock.com/ultracoin_733.1_win32.zip

[usukan]

Is ultrabex working, I seem to get different amount there than in my actual wallet, don't seem to be updating on ultrabex

Seems to be about 7 days behind - don't think its been re-synced since the latest fork

did you try the latest version?

whats the link to the latest version?

http://www.tumblingblock.com/ultracoin_733.1_win32.zip

Sorry I thought you were talking about a new block explorer - Ultrabex (not the latest wallet)

incidentally the link to the latest wallet is:

The Windows wallet is up http://ultracoin.net/dl/UltraCoinQT_win32_v7.4.1-9.zip

[Kn_os]

Can anybody from team resolve problem with Cryptsy wallet?
It has flag "network issue" for second week.
Can't withdraw UTC coins from cryptsy and do not want to leave satoshi on that scam exchange.

[usukan]

Can anybody from team resolve problem with Cryptsy wallet?
It has flag "network issue" for second week.
Can't withdraw UTC coins from cryptsy and do not want to leave satoshi on that scam exchange.

Ditto...

This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed - I warned the community about this several times recently.

here is one:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=727023.msg12844086#msg12844086

Situation has got worse since then.  Cryptsy is in total disarray at present.  There is no progress with wallets in maintenance due to whatever issue for several months now. Some BTC withdrawals stuck on pending for weeks - some delayed 3-4 days. Tier level is not necessarily important - the coin used for the withdrawal is important.

At last count Cryptsy had over 70 wallets "in maintenance".  I have had DEM trapped for about 7 months now (written off) - Support and Mullick have given up replying to anyone on wallets. Apart from "apologies for the inconvenience"

Some expect a bank run or just shutdown of Cryptsy shortly - BitJohn has quit.  If you are interested - go through the full thread. A lot is bullshit but many of the issues are real and Cryptsy is very HIGH RISK. I did not really believe it at first because I had had no issues with withdrawals - I now suspect that where there is smoke there is fire.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1173703.msg12984497#msg12984497

The chances of anybody getting the UTC wallet back online on Cryptsy are minimal. Steven - prove me wrong hopefully. I could not resist buying a few cheap ones even after my own advice.

I think Steven has an almost impossible task here so don't hold your breath.

[wtfc360]

Yes I have the latest wallet and that is no problem, It's ultrabex that don't seem to be uptodate...

Is ultrabex working, I seem to get different amount there than in my actual wallet, don't seem to be updating on ultrabex

Seems to be about 7 days behind - don't think its been re-synced since the latest fork

did you try the latest version?

[alenevaa]

Anybody know from the code what timeframe diff is calculated from?

The difficulty averages for 240 blocks (4 hours).

Code:

static const int64 nTargetTimespan5 = 60;  //  (60 seconds)
static const int64 nTargetSpacing5 = 60 ; // (60 seconds)
static const int64 nInterval5 = 1;         // check every block
static const int64 nAveragingInterval5 = 240; // 240 blocks, 4 hours
static const int64 nAveragingTargetTimespan5 = nAveragingInterval5 * nTargetSpacing5;  // (240 minutes)
static const int64 nAveragingStakeTimespan5 = nAveragingInterval5 * nStakeTargetSpacing2;  // (240 minutes)

static const int64 nMaxAdjustDownV5 = 16; // 16% adjustment down
static const int64 nMaxAdjustUpV5 = 12; // 12% adjustment up
static const int64 nMinActualTimespanV5 = nAveragingTargetTimespan5 * (100 - nMaxAdjustUpV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMaxActualTimespanV5 = nAveragingTargetTimespan5 * (100 + nMaxAdjustDownV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMinActualStakeTimespanV5 = nAveragingStakeTimespan5 * (100 - nMaxAdjustUpV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMaxActualStakeTimespanV5 = nAveragingStakeTimespan5 * (100 + nMaxAdjustDownV5) / 100;

[usukan]

Anybody know from the code what timeframe diff is calculated from?

The difficulty averages for 240 blocks (4 hours).

Code:

static const int64 nTargetTimespan5 = 60;  //  (60 seconds)
static const int64 nTargetSpacing5 = 60 ; // (60 seconds)
static const int64 nInterval5 = 1;         // check every block
static const int64 nAveragingInterval5 = 240; // 240 blocks, 4 hours
static const int64 nAveragingTargetTimespan5 = nAveragingInterval5 * nTargetSpacing5;  // (240 minutes)
static const int64 nAveragingStakeTimespan5 = nAveragingInterval5 * nStakeTargetSpacing2;  // (240 minutes)

static const int64 nMaxAdjustDownV5 = 16; // 16% adjustment down
static const int64 nMaxAdjustUpV5 = 12; // 12% adjustment up
static const int64 nMinActualTimespanV5 = nAveragingTargetTimespan5 * (100 - nMaxAdjustUpV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMaxActualTimespanV5 = nAveragingTargetTimespan5 * (100 + nMaxAdjustDownV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMinActualStakeTimespanV5 = nAveragingStakeTimespan5 * (100 - nMaxAdjustUpV5) / 100;
static const int64 nMaxActualStakeTimespanV5 = nAveragingStakeTimespan5 * (100 + nMaxAdjustDownV5) / 100;

I suppose the question would be - if its based on a 4 hr average - why are so few UTC being mined?

in 24 hrs it should be 14,400 UTC
Your site reports only 4,510 UTC rewarded in the last 24 hrs (and this is down by about 1000 from the day before).

Is this mining pool only 31% of the total UTC network hash perhaps?  How many solo's and other pools are out there? Is there anyway to find the total network hash rate?
Since the pool is getting every second block - it is at least approx 50% of total hashrate.  Is staking really the other half? So the reward from this pool should be at least 50% of 14,400 = 7,200 UTC (so 4,510 is still way short)


Really I have no expertise in these areas so I will leave it to others with better experience and more info to consider.

[Wh1teKn1ght]

is stake mining working for anyone since the fork? I haven't staked anything since Nov 7 and I've got plenty to stake. The stake icon says I'll stake in 12 minutes but the 12 minutes comes and goes without generating any stake or attempt to stake...

[usukan]

is stake mining working for anyone since the fork? I haven't staked anything since Nov 7 and I've got plenty to stake. The stake icon says I'll stake in 12 minutes but the 12 minutes comes and goes without generating any stake or attempt to stake...

Yes its working fine - but I dont get any stakes until its under 3 mins and especially sub 1 minute it hums

[usukan]

That was a low difficulty peak 0.0438 (compared to 0.06 - 0.08 over the last few days)

The difference may be due to the fact that the peak hashrate has fallen off when it goes to low dif (0.0002)

Less opportunistic miners - stable load

[Wh1teKn1ght]

ok, i'll monitor it, but I have like 1/9 weight of the Network Weight and still no staking since Nov 7

[usukan]

ok, i'll monitor it, but I have like 1/9 weight of the Network Weight and still no staking since Nov 7

To be honest I don't get any stakes till I am half or more than the network weight.

Its been like this even before the recent fork. 

I just connect up wallets after 2-4 weeks rest.

[alenevaa]

I suppose the question would be - if its based on a 4 hr average - why are so few UTC being mined?

in 24 hrs it should be 14,400 UTC
Your site reports only 4,510 UTC rewarded in the last 24 hrs (and this is down by about 1000 from the day before).

Is this mining pool only 31% of the total UTC network hash perhaps?  How many solo's and other pools are out there? Is there anyway to find the total network hash rate?
Since the pool is getting every second block - it is at least approx 50% of total hashrate.  Is staking really the other half? So the reward from this pool should be at least 50% of 14,400 = 7,200 UTC (so 4,510 is still way short)

Really I have no expertise in these areas so I will leave it to others with better experience and more info to consider.

There's another pool or solo miner who's mining when difficulty is low.
Just look at last found blocks with min diff=16

Code:

1602774
1602772
1602771
1602770
1602758
1602756
1602755
1602747
1602743
1602742

There's a gap between 1602758 and 1602770. These 11 blocks can't be pure PoS. Therefore somebody else has mined them.

[usukan]

I suppose the question would be - if its based on a 4 hr average - why are so few UTC being mined?

in 24 hrs it should be 14,400 UTC
Your site reports only 4,510 UTC rewarded in the last 24 hrs (and this is down by about 1000 from the day before).

Is this mining pool only 31% of the total UTC network hash perhaps?  How many solo's and other pools are out there? Is there anyway to find the total network hash rate?
Since the pool is getting every second block - it is at least approx 50% of total hashrate.  Is staking really the other half? So the reward from this pool should be at least 50% of 14,400 = 7,200 UTC (so 4,510 is still way short)

Really I have no expertise in these areas so I will leave it to others with better experience and more info to consider.

There's another pool or solo miner who's mining when difficulty is low.
Just look at last found blocks with min diff=16

Code:

1602774
1602772
1602771
1602770
1602758
1602756
1602755
1602747
1602743
1602742

There's a gap between 1602758 and 1602770. These 11 blocks can't be pure PoS. Therefore somebody else has mined them.

Cheers

[usukan]

That was a low difficulty peak 0.0438 (compared to 0.06 - 0.08 over the last few days)

The difference may be due to the fact that the peak hashrate has fallen off when it goes to low dif (0.0002)

Less opportunistic miners - stable load

Last diff peak 0.0179 - so its still coming down nicely.

This is looking good!

[alenevaa]

The last version of wallet [UltraCoin version v0.7.4.1-9-g23ef1a4-beta (2015-11-09 07:50:49 -0800)] has terminated with no (visible) reason.
The previous one works very stable under heavy load.

That's what I've found in debug.log

Code:

******* exception encountered *******
ultracoind[0x54187c]
ultracoind[0x4952c7]
ultracoind[0x4b52bc]
ultracoind[0x4b54a1]
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libboost_thread.so.1.55.0(+0xdaea)[0x7fd89df71aea]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x80a4)[0x7fd89cce10a4]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(clone+0x6d)[0x7fd89c1f404d]


************************
EXCEPTION: NSt8ios_base7failureE       
CDataStream::ignore() : end of data       
ultracoin in ThreadMessageHandler()    

 

I hope this may help in development..

The wallet has crashed again with the same exception:

Code:

  nActualTimespan = 329241 before bounds
GetNextStakeRequiredV5 RETARGET
nStakeTimespan = 14400    nActualTimespan = 16704
Before: 1d03ffff  00000003ffff0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
After:  1d03ffff  00000003ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
  nActualTimespan = 60385 before bounds
GetNextWorkRequiredV5 RETARGET
nTargetTimespan = 14400    nActualTimespan = 16704
Before: 1d4be638  0000004be6380000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
After:  1d580b0d  000000580b0dc28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c28f5c2
disconnecting node 122.168.246.145:44100


******* exception encountered *******
ultracoind[0x54187c]
ultracoind[0x4952c7]
ultracoind[0x4b52bc]
ultracoind[0x4b54a1]
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libboost_thread.so.1.55.0(+0xdaea)[0x7f7c74ea7aea]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x80a4)[0x7f7c73c170a4]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(clone+0x6d)[0x7f7c7312a04d]


************************
EXCEPTION: NSt8ios_base7failureE       
CDataStream::ignore() : end of data       
ultracoin in ThreadMessageHandler()       



UltraCoin version v0.7.4.1-9-g23ef1a4-beta (2015-11-09 07:50:49 -0800)
Using OpenSSL version OpenSSL 1.0.1k 8 Jan 2015
Startup time: 11/20/15 00:12:54
Loading block index...
Opening LevelDB in .ultracoin/txleveldb
Transaction index version is 70507
Opened LevelDB successfully
LoadBlockIndex(): hashBestChain=b72f01daa27234fb3170  height=1603643  trust=120402784  date=11/19/15 23:31:08
LoadBlockIndex(): synchronized checkpoint 00000012838d12032e91f4a1079f29cf4b088512d13ecb91f3451564c7f45212
Verifying last 2500 blocks at level 1
 Upgrade Info: ModifierUpgradeTime txdb initialization
 block index           32688ms
Time to send message to GUI:                0ms
Loading wallet...
nFileVersion = 70300
 wallet                 3644ms
Loading addresses...

@Devs: Do you have any patch or workarounds!?

[IMweasel]

I noticed that the wallet is sometimes 'hanging'
When i have it open and browse around in the menu, or settings, it would suddenly become unresponsive. Immediately the connected clients stop mining, as they cannot rech the wallet anymore. But after a little while, it gets going again and clients normally resume mining.
Never encountered a crash or something. (AMD FX990 chipset/Win7 64 bit)

[bathrobehero]

I noticed that the wallet is sometimes 'hanging'
When i have it open and browse around in the menu, or settings, it would suddenly become unresponsive. Immediately the connected clients stop mining, as they cannot rech the wallet anymore. But after a little while, it gets going again and clients normally resume mining.
Never encountered a crash or something. (AMD FX990 chipset/Win7 64 bit)

It did the same to me (getting very unresponsive after a while) but only in Sandboxie. Now that I have the wallet running on one of the mining rigs with a throwaway OS without Sandboxie, it's running perfectly fine for days.