0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: DACSunlimited on August 26, 2014, 03:21:08 pmRegardless of possible bug in the client, this behavior is still harmful to the network, topics related to this have already been discussed in the DPOS thread.Quote from: emski on August 26, 2014, 03:16:51 pmQuote from: DACSunlimited on August 26, 2014, 03:10:11 pmQuote from: xeroc on August 26, 2014, 03:06:49 pmWe should start a new thread and reflag delegates that are produce forks ...not missing blocks is VERY easy that way but does no good to the network! You just fail your responsibilities against the network ..I see missing a block A LOT less harmful for the network than producing forks!!The block must be in the same block number, and be produced by the same delegate, here is a example just taken.Even though falling into a fork might be a bug in latest version, but we definitely need to enable the auto fire operation.Quote FORKED BLOCK FORKING BLOCK ID SIGNING DELEGATE TXN COUNT SIZE TIMESTAMP LATENCY VALID IN CURRENT CHAIN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 321979 ef96dea7b653c7292c790935114360eee84708c7 e.coin 1 766 2014-08-26T14:17:10 169 YES YES 7aad16dc0e47e06a093888568bf268a1f2c1a188 btsnow 13 3857 2014-08-26T14:29:20 0 N/A NO 322117 f402e661aeff4ba1704dc59441e7ba05b4d83981 btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 0 YES YES 44cc35cf2a4afe38a3e8a4480e7c8f0953991e5a btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 1 N/A NO 322131 133db0ce1040b169226753ee8d2dc7735ff2a3b5 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 0 YES YES 0fad4bd06f03ab6c98a3d1b1094ac331f2d78b03 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 1 N/A NO 322136 8208884d226913d653520c52e65c75e58dcdb14f microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 0 YES YES 3e4d2d05f9d86382eaeb5c320c73323e5a2b6add microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 1 N/A NO 322139 c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NOHave you considered the possibility of BUG in the client?What if it exists prior 0.4.8 ?If it is a bug in the client then how replacing the delegate will help the network ?
Regardless of possible bug in the client, this behavior is still harmful to the network, topics related to this have already been discussed in the DPOS thread.Quote from: emski on August 26, 2014, 03:16:51 pmQuote from: DACSunlimited on August 26, 2014, 03:10:11 pmQuote from: xeroc on August 26, 2014, 03:06:49 pmWe should start a new thread and reflag delegates that are produce forks ...not missing blocks is VERY easy that way but does no good to the network! You just fail your responsibilities against the network ..I see missing a block A LOT less harmful for the network than producing forks!!The block must be in the same block number, and be produced by the same delegate, here is a example just taken.Even though falling into a fork might be a bug in latest version, but we definitely need to enable the auto fire operation.Quote FORKED BLOCK FORKING BLOCK ID SIGNING DELEGATE TXN COUNT SIZE TIMESTAMP LATENCY VALID IN CURRENT CHAIN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 321979 ef96dea7b653c7292c790935114360eee84708c7 e.coin 1 766 2014-08-26T14:17:10 169 YES YES 7aad16dc0e47e06a093888568bf268a1f2c1a188 btsnow 13 3857 2014-08-26T14:29:20 0 N/A NO 322117 f402e661aeff4ba1704dc59441e7ba05b4d83981 btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 0 YES YES 44cc35cf2a4afe38a3e8a4480e7c8f0953991e5a btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 1 N/A NO 322131 133db0ce1040b169226753ee8d2dc7735ff2a3b5 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 0 YES YES 0fad4bd06f03ab6c98a3d1b1094ac331f2d78b03 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 1 N/A NO 322136 8208884d226913d653520c52e65c75e58dcdb14f microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 0 YES YES 3e4d2d05f9d86382eaeb5c320c73323e5a2b6add microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 1 N/A NO 322139 c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NOHave you considered the possibility of BUG in the client?What if it exists prior 0.4.8 ?
Quote from: DACSunlimited on August 26, 2014, 03:10:11 pmQuote from: xeroc on August 26, 2014, 03:06:49 pmWe should start a new thread and reflag delegates that are produce forks ...not missing blocks is VERY easy that way but does no good to the network! You just fail your responsibilities against the network ..I see missing a block A LOT less harmful for the network than producing forks!!The block must be in the same block number, and be produced by the same delegate, here is a example just taken.Even though falling into a fork might be a bug in latest version, but we definitely need to enable the auto fire operation.Quote FORKED BLOCK FORKING BLOCK ID SIGNING DELEGATE TXN COUNT SIZE TIMESTAMP LATENCY VALID IN CURRENT CHAIN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 321979 ef96dea7b653c7292c790935114360eee84708c7 e.coin 1 766 2014-08-26T14:17:10 169 YES YES 7aad16dc0e47e06a093888568bf268a1f2c1a188 btsnow 13 3857 2014-08-26T14:29:20 0 N/A NO 322117 f402e661aeff4ba1704dc59441e7ba05b4d83981 btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 0 YES YES 44cc35cf2a4afe38a3e8a4480e7c8f0953991e5a btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 1 N/A NO 322131 133db0ce1040b169226753ee8d2dc7735ff2a3b5 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 0 YES YES 0fad4bd06f03ab6c98a3d1b1094ac331f2d78b03 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 1 N/A NO 322136 8208884d226913d653520c52e65c75e58dcdb14f microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 0 YES YES 3e4d2d05f9d86382eaeb5c320c73323e5a2b6add microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 1 N/A NO 322139 c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NOHave you considered the possibility of BUG in the client?What if it exists prior 0.4.8 ?
Quote from: xeroc on August 26, 2014, 03:06:49 pmWe should start a new thread and reflag delegates that are produce forks ...not missing blocks is VERY easy that way but does no good to the network! You just fail your responsibilities against the network ..I see missing a block A LOT less harmful for the network than producing forks!!The block must be in the same block number, and be produced by the same delegate, here is a example just taken.Even though falling into a fork might be a bug in latest version, but we definitely need to enable the auto fire operation.Quote FORKED BLOCK FORKING BLOCK ID SIGNING DELEGATE TXN COUNT SIZE TIMESTAMP LATENCY VALID IN CURRENT CHAIN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 321979 ef96dea7b653c7292c790935114360eee84708c7 e.coin 1 766 2014-08-26T14:17:10 169 YES YES 7aad16dc0e47e06a093888568bf268a1f2c1a188 btsnow 13 3857 2014-08-26T14:29:20 0 N/A NO 322117 f402e661aeff4ba1704dc59441e7ba05b4d83981 btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 0 YES YES 44cc35cf2a4afe38a3e8a4480e7c8f0953991e5a btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 1 N/A NO 322131 133db0ce1040b169226753ee8d2dc7735ff2a3b5 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 0 YES YES 0fad4bd06f03ab6c98a3d1b1094ac331f2d78b03 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 1 N/A NO 322136 8208884d226913d653520c52e65c75e58dcdb14f microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 0 YES YES 3e4d2d05f9d86382eaeb5c320c73323e5a2b6add microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 1 N/A NO 322139 c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NO
We should start a new thread and reflag delegates that are produce forks ...not missing blocks is VERY easy that way but does no good to the network! You just fail your responsibilities against the network ..I see missing a block A LOT less harmful for the network than producing forks!!
FORKED BLOCK FORKING BLOCK ID SIGNING DELEGATE TXN COUNT SIZE TIMESTAMP LATENCY VALID IN CURRENT CHAIN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 321979 ef96dea7b653c7292c790935114360eee84708c7 e.coin 1 766 2014-08-26T14:17:10 169 YES YES 7aad16dc0e47e06a093888568bf268a1f2c1a188 btsnow 13 3857 2014-08-26T14:29:20 0 N/A NO 322117 f402e661aeff4ba1704dc59441e7ba05b4d83981 btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 0 YES YES 44cc35cf2a4afe38a3e8a4480e7c8f0953991e5a btsx.chinesecommunity 0 166 2014-08-26T14:40:30 1 N/A NO 322131 133db0ce1040b169226753ee8d2dc7735ff2a3b5 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 0 YES YES 0fad4bd06f03ab6c98a3d1b1094ac331f2d78b03 google.helloworld 1 402 2014-08-26T14:42:50 1 N/A NO 322136 8208884d226913d653520c52e65c75e58dcdb14f microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 0 YES YES 3e4d2d05f9d86382eaeb5c320c73323e5a2b6add microsoft.helloworld 0 166 2014-08-26T14:43:40 1 N/A NO 322139 c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.ebit 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NO
info
The block must be in the same block number, and be produced by the same delegate, here is a example just taken.
Even though falling into a fork might be a bug in latest version, but we definitely need to enable the auto fire operation
To All delegates:Please NOT running your delegates in two clients at the same time, otherwise, any one post evidence like followingCode: [Select] c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.x 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.x 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NOWe will strongly recommend others to vote them out.
c6ce76317addf5f1b78e6700ea30da5f443f5e03 x.x 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 0 N/A NO 4322211b2f74a2d43183a17042c057da64c4486c x.x 0 166 2014-08-26T14:44:10 1 N/A NO
only when I opened the backup json file with an txt editor and erased the last coma ( , ) from the last page, saved the file and tried again I managed to restore my backup...(I read it here on the forum somewhere as a solution and it worked, in case you don't read/found it yet)
My seed node has been crashing and forking like nothing else.