Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Delegate Observations  (Read 543 times)

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Delegate Observations
« on: July 26, 2014, 01:49:08 PM »

1. I've noticed significant amount of forks lately. Any particular reason ?



2. I've noticed that one of the delegates misses blocks (3 so far) while the client is online.

Here is the last missed block:

 60948
     211d78002ecf8ad2b4b49c9a43b157e2064646ae             angel.bitdelegate              0       166 2014-07-26T13:20:10         0     YES                  NO
     a3c1f207ced3bc2b57869ed2661077ffea4207b4                mr.agsexplorer              0       166 2014-07-26T13:20:00        12     YES                 YES

List_errors mentions some exceptions but they are related to blocks 7531 and 47087 and 14872.
There are few more delegates working properly on the same client that are not missing blocks at all. Chances for this to happen randomly are 1/216. Is that particular delegate just unlucky or there might be something else?



3. Info reports  "blockchain_average_delegate_participation": "100.00 %" , How is this calculated ?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2014, 06:42:01 PM by emski »

Offline GaltReport

Re: Delegate ovservations
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2014, 02:50:28 PM »
I've noticed significant amount of forks lately. Any particular reason ?


I've noticed that one of the delegates misses blocks (3 so far) while the client is online.

Here is the last missed block:

 60948
     211d78002ecf8ad2b4b49c9a43b157e2064646ae             angel.bitdelegate              0       166 2014-07-26T13:20:10         0     YES                  NO
     a3c1f207ced3bc2b57869ed2661077ffea4207b4                mr.agsexplorer              0       166 2014-07-26T13:20:00        12     YES                 YES

List_errors mentions some exceptions but they are related to blocks 7531 and 47087 and 14872.
There are few more delegates working properly on the same client that are not missing blocks at all. Chances for this to happen randomly are 1/216. Is that particular delegate just unlucky or there might be something else?

Info reports  "blockchain_average_delegate_participation": "100.00 %" , How is this calculated ?

How do you identify forks?

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: Delegate ovservations
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2014, 04:01:44 PM »
Just blockchain_list_forks not sure how are they collected though.

Ggozzo

  • Guest
Warning. Another observation.
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2014, 04:23:10 PM »
I noticed that someone's has registered my delegates name minus 1 letter.  I am sure this is in attempt to collect funds based on someone mistyping or misspelling my name.  My delegates name is skyscraperfarms and someone registered skyscraperfarm.

Be careful and make sure you have the correct spelling of the person you are intending to send to.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11963
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Delegate observations
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2014, 04:29:27 PM »
I was causing the forks as my backupsystem got activated accidentally .. sorry for that .. will implement some security in my scripting soon
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: Delegate observations
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2014, 06:32:00 PM »
I was causing the forks as my backupsystem got activated accidentally .. sorry for that .. will implement some security in my scripting soon

I hope there is an automated system in the client in the future. I have got two machines but have block production enabled only on one.

Offline liondani

Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2014, 01:17:24 PM »
BTW when the blockchain_list_forks command mentions a block number
it is not the right one... the right one is + 1 block.

when it mentions for example block 51806 it is in reality 51807!
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Offline bytemaster

Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2014, 03:40:12 PM »
BTW when the blockchain_list_forks command mentions a block number
it is not the right one... the right one is + 1 block.

when it mentions for example block 51806 it is in reality 51807!

The fork is the block for which there are 2 next blocks. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2014, 02:34:24 PM »
I've seen strange pattern in the forks lately:
Code: [Select]
      85154
     e86dd2ad4549980139f65792045a66eb5f5f5119              c.delegate.xeroc              0       166 2014-07-29T11:11:50         0     YES                  NO
     740472051be51c9d7824c9e025a5d6455be23b15                        init97              0       166 2014-07-29T11:11:40        81     YES                 YES
          85180
     f540b93a91cde65690b2174e0d82ac7b554e7bc2                         emski              0       166 2014-07-29T11:17:00         0     YES                  NO
     fd900b79e1ba455f7b9677ece3ffc4ea7951b0e0                        init86              0       166 2014-07-29T11:16:40        21     YES                 YES
          85285
     9832840513ca59d3fd4e463b94bb56807438867f                    boombastic              0       166 2014-07-29T11:36:10         0     YES                  NO
     b27357e740273c7d4797df31a5754a72a438cae1                        init86              0       166 2014-07-29T11:36:00        70     YES                 YES
          85337
     b6f6e73dc7e9a3c4ef0b77d6d092bf15dac8b5b9             delegate-watchman              0       166 2014-07-29T11:45:50         0     YES                  NO
     ca6ed48bb428a74ec0d8d70d69a8dbe7b5300a5c                        init88              0       166 2014-07-29T11:45:30        21     YES                 YES
There are delegates with high latency and with earlier slot that are included in the chain.
However other delegates that produced and with low latency but at a later timeslot are not included in the chain.
How could this happen ?

Offline GaltReport

Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2014, 12:54:03 AM »
Couple questions:

1. How do  you check delegate latency
2. What does the ntp_error mean?  What is good and what is bad?


Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2014, 05:57:13 AM »
Couple questions:

1. How do  you check delegate latency
2. What does the ntp_error mean?  What is good and what is bad?
The data you see in the above post is provided by blockchain_list_forks.
ntp_error means the difference in your server clock than the one calculated by client. This is going to be obsolete as I've seen bytemaster posting about removing it. You should install ntpd.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2014, 06:44:27 AM »
Another question:
Code: [Select]
      97938
     40cd6d227b22d64e4462c69bfc1e3a51bd1312af             lotto.bitdelegate              0       166 2014-07-30T23:28:10         0     YES                  NO
     292ee282ffb1b366442b9114ffc9b32933f00048         btsx.chinesecommunity              0       166 2014-07-30T23:28:20       -10     YES                 YES

      98209
     3824eb804261540b5a538fdf91f7af4655fc425b                lotto-delegate              0       166 2014-07-31T00:15:30         0     YES                  NO
     0810b0cb42cccb84895470b6a7dd62baeebc284b         btsx.chinesecommunity              0       166 2014-07-31T00:15:40       -10     YES                 YES

      98328
     a424ad53d7a0feeb0a594a89d08cf314a902f90c         btsx.chinesecommunity              0       166 2014-07-31T00:36:20       -10     YES                 YES
     831953205b3982f0545d6330e059370a62286b52            a.delegate.charity              0       166 2014-07-31T00:36:10         0     N/A                  NO

          98388
     e42abc5a02e7ff5f1ae0e28196b70b8fc8907a67         btsx.chinesecommunity              0       166 2014-07-31T00:46:30       -10     YES                 YES
     7a3f2e7fa820e555a29676d2e761b4ce17013e90                      liondani              0       166 2014-07-31T00:46:20         0     N/A                  NO


What exactly happens in these forks?

Offline wackou

Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #12 on: July 31, 2014, 10:53:06 AM »
I also got a seemingly strange one:

Code: [Select]
          97525
     3e9d0e1a61194b490a2b874f1133c85088cdda6f               wackou-delegate              0       166 2014-07-30T22:15:50         0     YES                  NO
     73c52ca0e0838712c8662d82c5cc301bad0d8071                        init72              0       166 2014-07-30T22:16:00         0     YES                 YES

seems like I was on time and everything (as is shown by latency=0, I also had a lot of connections at that time and this was an isolated event, subsequent blocks after this one were produced correctly), is it just that somehow init72 "decided" to not include my block? Could it be that my block didn't propagate in less than 10 seconds to that node? In that case, it would probably be a good idea to have a "backbone" of broadcasting nodes, delegates and/or proxy nodes for delegates not wanting to broadcast their IP. I remember seeing this idea somewhere, maybe this has to be done in order for delegate to not randomly miss block (when they in fact correctly produced it)
Please vote for witness wackou! More info at http://digitalgaia.io

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11963
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #13 on: July 31, 2014, 11:26:18 AM »
AFAIR BM is working on a private network for active delegates .. I guess its just a matter of time
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline wackou

Re: Delegate Observations
« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2014, 11:43:05 AM »
Great! Although that should probably just be a temporary solution until a better solution is found out, because:
 - people will accuse us of forming a cabal
 - this somehow centralizes the delegates, as 1 bad delegate could harvest the IPs of all the other ones easily, which would make it easy to DDOS a good part of them

I'm thinking having some types of nodes which are low-latency and non-peer-IP-forwarding to which delegates could connect which could act as a sort of backbone for instant and anonymous block broadcasting could be a good solution. I'm still not completely convinced, but I'll post something more detailed if I can get it clearer in my head.
Please vote for witness wackou! More info at http://digitalgaia.io

 

Google+