|
SimonBelmond
|
 |
February 18, 2015, 02:10:09 PM |
|
Hi,
I'm responsible for the DB code. For those who care, it takes me 3h30 to build supernode, which approximates 90GB with the current blockchain size.
If you have less than 16GB of RAM and a HDD, do not expect supernode to build under a week. Your machine can't handle it. This DB type tracks ALL transactions in the blockchain, it's meant for heavy duty servers. You should at least try and see how long it will take your system to build fullnode before thinking of going with supernode.
The obvious bottleneck is I/O. Moreover, LMDB maps its whole dataset in RAM, so a machine with little RAM and a swapping file on a HDD will get crushed.
I tried to start with supernode and ran into performance issues as described by others. I only have 4gb ram so I guess it is to be expected according to gotapigs post above. I did not read through the whole thread and maybe the answers are given already... My questions: 1.) Would it be possible to import a supernode DB someone else built? 2.) If yes, would the ram requirements be signifficantly lower just to run and maintain the DB after? 3.) Are there any UI changes when running --supernode? Is there a simple way to e.g. check address balances? Or would I basically have to create a new watch only wallet, import the address and the advantage would be instant showing of balance without rescan? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"If you don't want people to know you're a scumbag then don't be a scumbag." -- margaritahuyan
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3668
Merit: 1347
Armory Developer
|
|
February 18, 2015, 03:06:20 PM |
|
I guess what I'm trying to say, can the notification pop as it detects new transactions while it's syncing, and then let you quickly flip through the notifications.
No history is displayed during syncing. The code is built on the assumption that it won't be displaying anything to the user until the DB is ready. Changing that now would be painful, and doesn't justify the meager benefit. Is this common or something? Are you suggesting that I delete the Bitcoin Core blockchain and let the entire thing re-download?
Yes My questions:
1.) Would it be possible to import a supernode DB someone else built?
2.) If yes, would the ram requirements be signifficantly lower just to run and maintain the DB after?
3.) Are there any UI changes when running --supernode? Is there a simple way to e.g. check address balances? Or would I basically have to create a new watch only wallet, import the address and the advantage would be instant showing of balance without rescan?
1) Yes. It will need to be using the page size as your machine's native page size, so there may be some limitation from one OS to another. 2) Yes and no. The DB will access less data to update the last few blocks, but a lot of that data is spread randomly around the DB, so unless you have a SSD or tons of RAM, expect extreme updating times regardless. 3) No changes in UI yet. Any wallet or private key you import will render quasi instantly (time to compute the paged history). We had planned on adding a plugin to quick look at any address, but that was put on hold. Maybe for 0.93.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
btchris
|
|
February 18, 2015, 05:45:40 PM |
|
I notice that this version is 64-bit only (I haven't checked earlier 0.92.99 releases though). Was that intentional? Historically the installs have been 32-bit executables, even on 64-bit Windows. Do you plan to drop support for pre-built Win32 binaries? Just wondering... (also, an extremely minor nitpick: the installer installs this 64-bit executable into the x86 Program Files directory, probably because the installer itself is a 32-bit app and its directories are being virtualized by Windows) |
|
|
|
|
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3668
Merit: 1347
Armory Developer
|
|
February 18, 2015, 07:30:18 PM |
|
I notice that this version is 64-bit only (I haven't checked earlier 0.92.99 releases though). Was that intentional? Historically the installs have been 32-bit executables, even on 64-bit Windows. Do you plan to drop support for pre-built Win32 binaries? Just wondering...
(also, an extremely minor nitpick: the installer installs this 64-bit executable into the x86 Program Files directory, probably because the installer itself is a 32-bit app and its directories are being virtualized by Windows)
LMDB maps the entire underlying dataset in RAM. Can't address 30GB of data in x86. And that's just fullnode, supernode requires 3x that currently. For 0.93.1, fullnode should be around 120MB so it could function in x86, but we still do not plan on releasing x64 Windows builds for online Armory. There will be a x86 Windows build to support people using Windows on their offline signer (hopefully I'll manage something for WinXP), but it won't be able to sync due to LMDB's RAM requirement. |
|
|
|
zombieslayer9099
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
Java Coder
|
|
February 18, 2015, 09:51:50 PM |
|
I have a small feature request, when importing privkey to wallet, can an option to not rescan the DB for transactions be added for expert users?
|
Did you know there are 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 possible bitcoin addresses? To put that into perspective, that's greater than the width of the universe in zeptometers (10^-21 meter). ▁ ▂ ▄ ▅ ▆ Cloudmining 101: how to avoid scams ▆ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▁ |
|
|
|
aerobatic
|
|
February 18, 2015, 10:45:15 PM |
|
re: MAC OSX version. as mentioned (by me) a few days ago, armory 0.92.99.6 crashes every time i run it, within seconds. Never completely starts up (crashes quickly after startup, every time) just tried 0.92.99.7 and has the same behaviour. this version is still highly unstable (on Mac at least) and doesn't feel like an RC to me (sorry). Am attempting to run it on recent hardware (iMac Retina 5K, late 2014) with current OSX 10.10.2 Yosemite. Bitcoin-QT Core 0.10 |
|
|
|
|
mmortal03
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1762
Merit: 1010
|
|
February 18, 2015, 10:48:46 PM
Last edit: February 19, 2015, 02:31:22 AM by mmortal03 |
|
Is this common or something? Are you suggesting that I delete the Bitcoin Core blockchain and let the entire thing re-download?
Yes That did fix it. Wow, is it not a bug in Bitcoin Core that the user's copy of the blockchain can be corrupted like that and not be self-corrected/act as if everything is good? |
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074
|
|
February 19, 2015, 12:30:22 AM |
|
One thing I'm afraid to test: does the new Db build deterministically? Can I run Core 0.9.3 and 0.10.0 with the same 0.93 Armory database?
|
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
|
doug_armory
|
|
February 19, 2015, 01:21:18 AM |
|
im trying to test the mac version and it crashes within seconds of being started (every time). (Yosemite 10.10.2)
do you already know about this or do you want any crash logs?
thanks
Sorry. Just now saw this. Can you pass along the logs and, if possible, the stack trace that shows where Armory is crashing? Before doing this, though, can you delete your database? (I had a similar issue long ago, albeit while the new DB was under heavy development.) Go under /Users/*username*/Library/Application Support/Armory/databases/ and delete the contents. Thanks. |
Senior Developer - Armory Technologies, Inc.
|
|
|
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3668
Merit: 1347
Armory Developer
|
|
February 19, 2015, 04:46:47 AM |
|
That did fix it. Wow, is it not a bug in Bitcoin Core that the user's copy of the blockchain can be corrupted like that and not be self-corrected/act as if everything is good?
Armory depends on the blkxxxxx.dat files, which are raw bitmaps of the block data. Core flushes the raw data to disk but doesn't verify the committed data, nor does it bother to delete corrupt data and just appends valid data to it. This will trip Armory on occasions. Eventually we plan on moving to block over p2p, at which point I expect Core will realize the block data it's being asked to produce is corrupt (and maybe do something about it?). One thing I'm afraid to test: does the new Db build deterministically? Can I run Core 0.9.3 and 0.10.0 with the same 0.93 Armory database?
I expect the current one is "agnostic" (it keeps all block data in DB and resolves last known position in file by header hash). The new format in 0.93.1 won't be "agnostic", but the building will also be a lot faster, and is fully isolated from scanning. If it turns out people will want to match their DB against different blockchain folders, I may just add an option to rebuild the DB (takes about 45sec on my SSD setup) but salvage the scan data. |
|
|
|
PRab
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
February 19, 2015, 05:45:22 AM |
|
I'm probably too late for 0.93, but on the Announcemnts tab, I believe it should only show Notifications relevant to the running version. Right now I see 2 notifications that don't apply to 0.93 (One is all the way back from 0.90).
|
|
|
|
|
|
SimonBelmond
|
|
February 19, 2015, 09:19:47 AM |
|
My questions:
1.) Would it be possible to import a supernode DB someone else built?
2.) If yes, would the ram requirements be signifficantly lower just to run and maintain the DB after?
3.) Are there any UI changes when running --supernode? Is there a simple way to e.g. check address balances? Or would I basically have to create a new watch only wallet, import the address and the advantage would be instant showing of balance without rescan?
1) Yes. It will need to be using the page size as your machine's native page size, so there may be some limitation from one OS to another. 2) Yes and no. The DB will access less data to update the last few blocks, but a lot of that data is spread randomly around the DB, so unless you have a SSD or tons of RAM, expect extreme updating times regardless. 3) No changes in UI yet. Any wallet or private key you import will render quasi instantly (time to compute the paged history). We had planned on adding a plugin to quick look at any address, but that was put on hold. Maybe for 0.93.1 Anyone care to torrent a supernode db? I would love to try. I am not so sure what page size means exactly but i am on x64 Ubuntu 14.04 shall it matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
aerobatic
|
|
February 19, 2015, 11:42:37 AM |
|
im trying to test the mac version and it crashes within seconds of being started (every time). (Yosemite 10.10.2)
do you already know about this or do you want any crash logs?
thanks
Sorry. Just now saw this. Can you pass along the logs and, if possible, the stack trace that shows where Armory is crashing? Before doing this, though, can you delete your database? (I had a similar issue long ago, albeit while the new DB was under heavy development.) Go under /Users/*username*/Library/Application Support/Armory/databases/ and delete the contents. Thanks. thanks, will pass along logs. how shall i do that? email them to you? put them here in a forum post? |
|
|
|
|
|
aerobatic
|
|
February 19, 2015, 12:14:35 PM |
|
im trying to test the mac version and it crashes within seconds of being started (every time). (Yosemite 10.10.2)
do you already know about this or do you want any crash logs?
thanks
Sorry. Just now saw this. Can you pass along the logs and, if possible, the stack trace that shows where Armory is crashing? Before doing this, though, can you delete your database? (I had a similar issue long ago, albeit while the new DB was under heavy development.) Go under /Users/*username*/Library/Application Support/Armory/databases/ and delete the contents. Thanks. thanks, will pass along logs. how shall i do that? email them to you? put them here in a forum post? OK, have done that (deleted all the files in the databases folder)... and it still crashes a few seconds after startup.. during the Wallet consistency check. I have sent you the log from before i deleted the databases, and i will also send you the crash log from after i tried again (deleted databases). |
|
|
|
|
|
btchris
|
|
February 19, 2015, 02:09:04 PM |
|
I notice that this version is 64-bit only (I haven't checked earlier 0.92.99 releases though). Was that intentional? Historically the installs have been 32-bit executables, even on 64-bit Windows. Do you plan to drop support for pre-built Win32 binaries? Just wondering...
(also, an extremely minor nitpick: the installer installs this 64-bit executable into the x86 Program Files directory, probably because the installer itself is a 32-bit app and its directories are being virtualized by Windows)
LMDB maps the entire underlying dataset in RAM. Can't address 30GB of data in x86. And that's just fullnode, supernode requires 3x that currently. For 0.93.1, fullnode should be around 120MB so it could function in x86, but we still do not plan on releasing x64 Windows builds for online Armory. There will be a x86 Windows build to support people using Windows on their offline signer (hopefully I'll manage something for WinXP), but it won't be able to sync due to LMDB's RAM requirement. Thanks for the detailed response. ...but we still do not plan on releasing x64 Windows builds for online Armory.
You meant no x86 releases for online Armory, correct? (otherwise I'm confused) You should probably be sure to point this out the download page (and in future download links here) so that people stuck on 32-bit machines do not inadvertently overwrite their 32-bit versions with non-working 64-bit versions... just a suggestion. |
|
|
|
|
goatpig
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3668
Merit: 1347
Armory Developer
|
|
February 19, 2015, 02:16:35 PM |
|
You meant no x86 releases for online Armory, correct? (otherwise I'm confused)
Yeah my bad, I derped -_-" You should probably be sure to point this out the download page (and in future download links here) so that people stuck on 32-bit machines do not inadvertently overwrite their 32-bit versions with non-working 64-bit versions... just a suggestion.
That's for Windows only, and something we should do at installer level really. We won't remove the link to 0.92.3 till we got a x86 Windows build for 0.93.1. |
|
|
|
|
btchris
|
|
February 19, 2015, 02:59:54 PM |
|
You should probably be sure to point this out the download page (and in future download links here) so that people stuck on 32-bit machines do not inadvertently overwrite their 32-bit versions with non-working 64-bit versions... just a suggestion.
That's for Windows only, and something we should do at installer level really. We won't remove the link to 0.92.3 till we got a x86 Windows build for 0.93.1. Yup, I meant only for the future. And if you've never done it in NSIS before, it's as easy as "!include x64.nsh" and then "${IfNot} ${RunningX64}" to check... |
|
|
|
|
|
doug_armory
|
|
February 19, 2015, 03:20:41 PM |
|
thanks, will pass along logs. how shall i do that? email them to you? put them here in a forum post?
A support ticket is the best option. |
Senior Developer - Armory Technologies, Inc.
|
|
|
knahrvorn
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 58
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2015, 08:10:26 PM |
|
If I upgrade my cold storage setup to 0.93, would I need to upgrade both the online and offline computer Armorys, or can I just update Armory on the online computer and let Armory on the offline computer stay on 0.92 and still be able to do a cold storage transaction using the two?
|
|
|
|
|
|
