◈◈Bitcredit ◈◈ Migrating to UniQredit◈◈

[NaN_PTS]

In the next few hours i will release a mandatory update that will disconnect all pre 0.30.16.4 clients.

You know that this will kill the whole network because p2pool does not handle transactions correctly. First, p2pool needs to be fixed because most blocks are mined with my solo miner. After that you can enforce the update.

p2pool on what wallet version run ?

Simply look at the sharp drops of the hashrate of p2pool.website. I cannot demonstrate it now because I don't have access to a wallet with coins at the moment. I've never seen a p2pool block with any transactions...

[1713885090]

1713885090

[1713885090]

1713885090

[1713885090]

1713885090

[1713885090]

1713885090

[1713885090]

1713885090

[bitcreditscc]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of block size, and when we implemented the current version, we left a lot of leg room so that ceases to be an issue.

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

[dragos_bdi]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

[bitcreditscc]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Besides, failure to act now will just lead to compound problems later. For example the old clients just invalidated 20 ish blocks by the new wallets. this is an issue that can be fixed and it would be a disservice for me not to address this.

the p2pool is already running 0.30.16.4 so i see no reason to keep old clients on the network.

[dragos_bdi]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

[bitcreditscc]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

that would be awesome


if you look at this commit :-

https://github.com/bitcreditscc/p2pool/commit/8b9a7b538d8352c59103c8d8af7937e36061962c

you'll see that we are only using a max 0.5 Mb of the available 1MB blocksize for transactions.

I will increase this as necessary, otherwise the p2pool issue is a thing of the past, and only fluke blocks that actually fill up all the space ever cause issues.

[NaN_PTS]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

that would be awesome


if you look at this commit :-

https://github.com/bitcreditscc/p2pool/commit/8b9a7b538d8352c59103c8d8af7937e36061962c

you'll see that we are only using a max 0.5 Mb of the available 1MB blocksize for transactions.

I will increase this as necessary, otherwise the p2pool issue is a thing of the past, and only fluke blocks that actually fill up all the space ever cause issues.

The issue has nothing to do with the maximum blocksize. p2pool crashed with only 2 transactions in the past. It has nothing to do with the wallet, either. Look at the current hashrate of p2pool. It goes down with only two transactions. If you want to update the wallet (with a hardfork), you have to contact the exchanges, too.
EDIT: https://www.dropbox.com/s/qa92qcgjgf9tl1b/hashrate.png?dl=0
{
    "capabilities" : [
        "proposal"
    ],
    "version" : 2,
    "previousblockhash" : "000001253da70c5bbba1fe69e3843f0fa74a01cfca8a8e463bc21afeba685ccf",
    "transactions" : [
        {
            "data" : "010000000106c7c792d48818ca40b53ff6da5cbeff413f5b9ad243b156ed5f09b3761cdbd000000 0006b483045022100a59a119da18ff0b8fd4452e0c1d2584f993465c8a05431af6f529c83fa11a2 3b02205b6cceee6d9a40be6076e8c64755de9da5655950ddb1ff70e7eac80167ba2b6e0121034fd 0c17fd527cb682227d2442001d86aa94476b66f5e7e380350ea4aefdc3b72feffffff0240420f00 000000001976a9148c601112cd36e77a57bb7d65d9339f3030030b2088ac80457c3b00000000197 6a9140f48e4a041b9eb2d3fa272f147f32a37c3a73f9e88ac28470100",
            "hash" : "8d9769138c54522dfc2c203f3135036cf1b1cb15c1997eff0790cd53c818fad2",
            "depends" : [
            ],
            "fee" : 1000000,
            "sigops" : 2
        },
        {
            "data" : "01000000017899d762e81e14edf9b320beacdf39433ee704b0e3990dd66d0c3521d0b8d47501000 0006a4730440220194cfb1597ff6d162bf6a08103539eb6b9d87997fb77835a55280ad4b9f1d93b 0220500233f8cee6588f2578f5ff289a4654a7bbbf14a6985344945a9b18814cec5c0121029f95c ba2829852291bcc3c6ad7a4230c27f8cb8911c685199c08309150ad955cfeffffff0280457c3b00 0000001976a914ce5d5d9cd6170d011422a5365a620be0bc8faf6d88ac40420f00000000001976a 9148c601112cd36e77a57bb7d65d9339f3030030b2088ac28470100",
            "hash" : "7ac8b5ba54cab0fed2dc139eac7609161a5e4c377e5f961c7e8815e756217dc0",
            "depends" : [
            ],
            "fee" : 1000000,
            "sigops" : 2
        }
    ],
    "coinbaseaux" : {
        "flags" : "062f503253482f"
    },
    "coinbasevalue" : 5002000000,
    "longpollid" : "000001253da70c5bbba1fe69e3843f0fa74a01cfca8a8e463bc21afeba685ccf784",
    "target" : "00001cb9c0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
    "mintime" : 1428506992,
    "mutable" : [
        "time",
        "transactions",
        "prevblock"
    ],
    "noncerange" : "00000000ffffffff",
    "sigoplimit" : 20000,
    "sizelimit" : 1000000,
    "curtime" : 1428507768,
    "bits" : "1e1cb9c0",
    "height" : 83763,
    "votes" : [
    ],
    "payee" : "67bLHh7ezFruDULpZXEuiM6d6WZyDDyxzb",
    "payee_amount" : 1000400000,
    "masternode_payments" : true,
    "enforce_masternode_payments" : true
}

[bitcreditscc]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

that would be awesome


if you look at this commit :-

https://github.com/bitcreditscc/p2pool/commit/8b9a7b538d8352c59103c8d8af7937e36061962c

you'll see that we are only using a max 0.5 Mb of the available 1MB blocksize for transactions.

I will increase this as necessary, otherwise the p2pool issue is a thing of the past, and only fluke blocks that actually fill up all the space ever cause issues.

The issue has nothing to do with the maximum blocksize. p2pool crashed with only 2 transactions in the past. It has nothing to do with the wallet, either. Look at the current hashrate of p2pool. It goes down with only two transactions. If you want to update the wallet (with a hardfork), you have to contact the exchanges, too.

did you look at the changes in the above commit? it is about block size, this is determined by the number of transactions. a transaction's size is dependent on the number of inputs in the tx. if you are sending a tx with lots of inputs, it's size is exponentially larger than that of a single input.

this is not a hard fork, it is simply an update to encourage users to use the correct version of the wallet. 0.30.16.4 and the update 0.30.16.5 are compatible, all other previous wallets are obsolete.

[NaN_PTS]

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.

P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the solution has been found. The sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of increasing variables relating to block

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

that would be awesome


if you look at this commit :-

https://github.com/bitcreditscc/p2pool/commit/8b9a7b538d8352c59103c8d8af7937e36061962c

you'll see that we are only using a max 0.5 Mb of the available 1MB blocksize for transactions.

I will increase this as necessary, otherwise the p2pool issue is a thing of the past, and only fluke blocks that actually fill up all the space ever cause issues.

The issue has nothing to do with the maximum blocksize. p2pool crashed with only 2 transactions in the past. It has nothing to do with the wallet, either. Look at the current hashrate of p2pool. It goes down with only two transactions. If you want to update the wallet (with a hardfork), you have to contact the exchanges, too.

did you look at the changes in the above commit? it is about block size, this is determined by the number of transactions. a transaction's size is dependent on the number of inputs in the tx. if you are sending a tx with lots of inputs, it's size is exponentially larger than that of a single input.

this is not a hard fork, it is simply an update to encourage users to use the correct version of the wallet. 0.30.16.4 and the update 0.30.16.5 are compatible, all other previous wallets are obsolete.

Then, explain me why p2pool did crash with only 2 transactions? THIS has NOTHING to do with the block size.
EDIT: I've included a screenshot in my original post and the getblocktemplate output of the block with the transactions.

[bitcreditscc]

look at the pool, no crash 
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

[NaN_PTS]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qa92qcgjgf9tl1b/hashrate.png?dl=0
If old clients are cut out, then exchanges won't work any more because they most likely use the old client. Furthermore, p2pool does not include any transactions into blocks and my miner does not work with the new wallet. Therefore, the network will be stuck. If you do not communicate with people, then they cannot adopt to changes. Or did you tell me, how the coinbase has to look like or how to deal with future changes? No, I stumbled across the new coinbase when I was trying to figure out what was wrong with 0.30.16. I do not even know, why I'm helping you, when you never listen to me.

[bitcreditscc]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

[NaN_PTS]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

[bitcreditscc]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4? There is no way i will let those clients continue on this network . there is just no real reason to keep old client, worse off they are working on a different set of rules than the rest.

Everyone must upgrade and keep up with supported client and protocol. those old client will cause massive forking at block 85000, their owners just need to update.

[antonio8]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4?

I am solo mining with 0.30.16.4b and finding blocks

[NaN_PTS]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4?

because the clpts rpc solo miner will use the wrong coinbase, e.g. it will not pay masternodes... You could have asked me weeks ago to support MN payments in the miner, but then I had to know how getblocktemplate will work. Obviously, you didn't notice the implications of the update.

[bobbba]

I am having trouble getting the wallet(0.30.16.) to work on my new machine. No Block Source Available - 4 days behind. I have the same version installed on another machine and it is working fine. Any help would be appreciated.

[NaN_PTS]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4?

I am solo mining with 0.30.16.4b and finding blocks

Yes, because the network accepts the blocks. But they do not pay masternodes. In the future those blocks won't be accepted (or shouldn't be accepted)

[antonio8]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4?

I am solo mining with 0.30.16.4b and finding blocks

Yes, because the network accepts the blocks. But they do not pay masternodes. In the future those blocks won't be accepted (or shouldn't be accepted)

So after block 85,00 (or whatever it is) all my solo blocks will be rejected?

[NaN_PTS]

look at the pool, no crash  
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Look at the screen shot I've posted. The hashrate went to zero.

yes so for one block, the pool did not hash.... how does that connect with updating the wallet and cutting off old unsupported wallets?

t
WTF? p2pool does not work if any transaction is included in a block. If you cut out the solo miners with 0.30.14, no one will include the transactions into the chain. Or an attacker will include his transactions. That was just a demonstration. One can DOS p2pool for hours.

and why can they not solo mine with 0.30.16.4?

I am solo mining with 0.30.16.4b and finding blocks

Yes, because the network accepts the blocks. But they do not pay masternodes. In the future those blocks won't be accepted (or shouldn't be accepted)

So after block 85,00 (or whatever it is) all my solo blocks will be rejected?

I guess. But bitcreditscc does no testing at all.