Author Topic: small BTC transactions don't show in wallet_account_transaction_history  (Read 2613 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline monsterer

What is output if recipient does "wallet_verify_titan_deposit 7c6f9e64d6609f26b4eb4353d4e56458fbf2a168" on the bad transaction?

Code: [Select]
wallet_verify_titan_deposit 7c6f9e64d6609f26b4eb4353d4e56458fbf2a168
{
  "from": "monsterer",
  "to": "metaexchangebtc",
  "amount": {
    "amount": 10000,
    "asset_id": 4
  },
  "memo": "4-12HcYvrSNWCcLj5TJaFGfFBvN8uTuZsd"
}
{
  "from": "monsterer",
  "to": "metaexchangebtc",
  "amount": {
    "amount": 10000,
    "asset_id": 4
  },
  "memo": "4-12HcYvrSNWCcLj5TJaFGfFBvN8uTuZsd"
}
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline vikram

What is output if recipient does "wallet_verify_titan_deposit 7c6f9e64d6609f26b4eb4353d4e56458fbf2a168" on the bad transaction?

Offline vikram

Hmm, maybe it has to do with yield.. Can you check if the same problem is there even when there is no accumulated yield?

You might be right - just sent another 0.0001 BTC now and it turned up just fine with no yield payment.

Good to know; I will take another look: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/issues/1399

Let me know if you notice any other details about the problem.

Offline monsterer

Hmm, maybe it has to do with yield.. Can you check if the same problem is there even when there is no accumulated yield?

You might be right - just sent another 0.0001 BTC now and it turned up just fine with no yield payment.
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline vikram

I am unable reproduce this--does this reliably happen for different recipient wallets? What is the output if the recipient does "wallet_scan_transaction <transaction_id>" ?

I've not tried any other wallets. The (partial) output is this:

Code: [Select]
,{
        "type": "withdraw_op_type",
        "data": {
          "balance_id": "BTS8zw3cCxxEaw5Aea14iQ7jGSLQG3bA8kFt",
          "amount": 10000,
          "claim_input_data": ""
        }
      },{
        "type": "withdraw_op_type",
        "data": {
          "balance_id": "BTS9G75mAbk1k9NvR4RHWfaiSzzNRug81Fj2",
          "amount": 10000,
          "claim_input_data": ""
        }
      }
    ],
    "signatures": [
      "1f399a79106c477a3f4461660d496e728e60dc6f6e981afcac981b441a682c370f6f00b4657cb30353c5bed882d4e09bf5de9aad72c3a64c3c00c7b0c0c7f271f1",
      "1f163fa994a4110b6bfc68e7f47a4b76ff8f464d5b779049cf530c015d21fc3c4c35daef4e83a4902ccc90442fea1c27cf84404a5c0de0a9dc2f163e89243e5aab"
    ]
  },
  "ledger_entries": [],
  "fee": {
    "amount": 10000,
    "asset_id": 0
  },
  "created_time": "2015-02-15T11:38:40",
  "received_time": "2015-02-15T11:38:40",
  "extra_addresses": []
}

Note the lack of ledger entry values?

edit: could it be to do with the multiple outputs in the very first transaction? (output from sender's wallet):

Code: [Select]
> wallet_get_transaction 7c6f9e64

 TIMESTAMP           BLOCK     FROM                TO                  AMOUNT                  MEMO                                        FEE                 ID     
========================================================================================================================================================================
|2015-02-15T11:38:34 1795400   NETWORK             monsterer           0.00010020 BTC          yield                                       0.10000 BTS         7c6f9e64|
|                              monsterer           UNKNOWN             0.00000 BTS                                                                                     |
|                              NETWORK             monsterer           0.00000020 BTC          yield                                                                   |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm, maybe it has to do with yield.. Can you check if the same problem is there even when there is no accumulated yield?

Offline monsterer

There are known bugs with wallet_account_transaction_history.. Is your balances correct? If yes you could just ignore the history by now.

I can't ignore wallet_account_transaction_history, because that's what metaexchange.info uses to process incoming transactions. The alternative is to manually parse the blockchain, which is totally insane.
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
There are known bugs with wallet_account_transaction_history.. Is your balances correct? If yes you could just ignore the history by now.

By the way here is where the 0.0001 BTC went:
Code: [Select]
(wallet closed) >>> blockchain_get_transaction 7c6f9e64d6609f26b4eb4353d4e56458fbf2a168
[
  "7c6f9e64d6609f26b4eb4353d4e56458fbf2a168",{
    "trx": {
      "expiration": "2015-02-15T12:45:53",
      "reserved": null,
      "operations": [{
          "type": "deposit_op_type",
          "data": {
            "amount": 10000,
            "condition": {
              "asset_id": 4,
              "slate_id": 0,
              "type": "withdraw_signature_type",
              "data": {
                "owner": "BTS3qb4gPgkT7QDMxhoPLnHFs6wQeS3wKgwu",
                "memo": {
                  "one_time_key": "BTS5v7iybMfyH3KXPF41vPjyVixVHEJSAZJEwyoD9ieZ4u1kUGnPA",
                  "encrypted_memo_data": "93847b9d575a58b2d71c0d4d263a6e869f7d18b4819c81c0fad71881fcd902446c6c33175fe848e408d0f907a120ecab86f881bf5622c75054b57ad50392b4fc3adcda537051def8d914bb061f8a2089eb26c836cfae9b4ed4cb862908a6ab6c"
                }
              }
            }
          }
        }
...

Code: [Select]
(wallet closed) >>> blockchain_list_address_balances "BTS3qb4gPgkT7QDMxhoPLnHFs6wQeS3wKgwu"
[[
    "BTS6LwqtsYUHXjHDFXjBejdr8aJfdEnRQ4HH",{
      "condition": {
        "asset_id": 4,
        "slate_id": 0,
        "type": "withdraw_signature_type",
        "data": {
          "owner": "BTS3qb4gPgkT7QDMxhoPLnHFs6wQeS3wKgwu",
          "memo": {
            "one_time_key": "BTS5v7iybMfyH3KXPF41vPjyVixVHEJSAZJEwyoD9ieZ4u1kUGnPA",
            "encrypted_memo_data": "93847b9d575a58b2d71c0d4d263a6e869f7d18b4819c81c0fad71881fcd902446c6c33175fe848e408d0f907a120ecab86f881bf5622c75054b57ad50392b4fc3adcda537051def8d914bb061f8a2089eb26c836cfae9b4ed4cb862908a6ab6c"
          }
        }
      },
      "balance": 10000,
      "restricted_owner": null,
      "snapshot_info": null,
      "deposit_date": "2015-02-15T11:38:30",
      "last_update": "2015-02-15T11:38:30",
      "meta_data": null
    }
  ]
]

Try:
Code: [Select]
wallet_dump_private_key BTS3qb4gPgkT7QDMxhoPLnHFs6wQeS3wKgwu
wallet_dump_private_key BTS6LwqtsYUHXjHDFXjBejdr8aJfdEnRQ4HH
It's fine if you see a key.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline monsterer

I am unable reproduce this--does this reliably happen for different recipient wallets? What is the output if the recipient does "wallet_scan_transaction <transaction_id>" ?

I've not tried any other wallets. The (partial) output is this:

Code: [Select]
,{
        "type": "withdraw_op_type",
        "data": {
          "balance_id": "BTS8zw3cCxxEaw5Aea14iQ7jGSLQG3bA8kFt",
          "amount": 10000,
          "claim_input_data": ""
        }
      },{
        "type": "withdraw_op_type",
        "data": {
          "balance_id": "BTS9G75mAbk1k9NvR4RHWfaiSzzNRug81Fj2",
          "amount": 10000,
          "claim_input_data": ""
        }
      }
    ],
    "signatures": [
      "1f399a79106c477a3f4461660d496e728e60dc6f6e981afcac981b441a682c370f6f00b4657cb30353c5bed882d4e09bf5de9aad72c3a64c3c00c7b0c0c7f271f1",
      "1f163fa994a4110b6bfc68e7f47a4b76ff8f464d5b779049cf530c015d21fc3c4c35daef4e83a4902ccc90442fea1c27cf84404a5c0de0a9dc2f163e89243e5aab"
    ]
  },
  "ledger_entries": [],
  "fee": {
    "amount": 10000,
    "asset_id": 0
  },
  "created_time": "2015-02-15T11:38:40",
  "received_time": "2015-02-15T11:38:40",
  "extra_addresses": []
}

Note the lack of ledger entry values?

edit: could it be to do with the multiple outputs in the very first transaction? (output from sender's wallet):

Code: [Select]
> wallet_get_transaction 7c6f9e64

 TIMESTAMP           BLOCK     FROM                TO                  AMOUNT                  MEMO                                        FEE                 ID     
========================================================================================================================================================================
|2015-02-15T11:38:34 1795400   NETWORK             monsterer           0.00010020 BTC          yield                                       0.10000 BTS         7c6f9e64|
|                              monsterer           UNKNOWN             0.00000 BTS                                                                                     |
|                              NETWORK             monsterer           0.00000020 BTC          yield                                                                   |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
« Last Edit: February 18, 2015, 08:18:07 pm by monsterer »
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline vikram

I am unable reproduce this--does this reliably happen for different recipient wallets? What is the output if the recipient does "wallet_scan_transaction <transaction_id>" ?

Offline monsterer

Please post or PM me the transaction IDs of the example transactions.

7c6f9e64
02b5c3ed
7a0fa489

All appear in the outgoing wallet, but never showed up in the incoming wallet's wallet_account_transaction_history results.
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline vikram

Please post or PM me the transaction IDs of the example transactions.

Offline monsterer

If I send 0.0001 BTC it never appears in the receivers wallet_account_transaction_history, but if I send 0.001 it does!

The offending transaction(s) do arrive because wallet_verify_titan_deposit shows they arrived, but wallet_account_transaction_history never shows them!

Needless to say this is causing me all kinds of problems - is there some kind of new dust limit somewhere?
« Last Edit: February 15, 2015, 02:13:18 pm by monsterer »
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads