BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: liondani on July 22, 2014, 11:07:35 pm
-
Any idea what is happening?
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xq9vNHzWaG0/U87tRc9Nh3I/AAAAAAAADBM/Ivenx3xzuQM/s1600/Screenshot+2014-07-23+01.57.41.png)
-
Looks like you lost connection / stopped receiving blocks.
-
Looks like you lost connection / stopped receiving blocks.
Weird because my linux system (same router)
worked fine and signed the block...
And I was listening let's talk bitcoin on the "problematic" system the same time...
so I assume my windows BTSX client loosed connection for some reason.... (not my system)
>> blockchain_list_blocks 31022 40
HEIGHT TIMESTAMP SIGNING DELEGATE # TXS SIZE TOTAL FEES LATENCY PROCESSING TIME
===================================================================================================================
31022 2014-07-22T22:45:50 lion 0 166 0.00000 BTSX -8 0.007001
31023 2014-07-22T22:46:00 bitsharesx-delegate 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1295 0.002
31024 2014-07-22T22:46:10 boombastic 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1285 0
31025 2014-07-22T22:46:20 delegate2.adam 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1275 0.026002
31026 2014-07-22T22:46:30 bts500rmb 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1265 0.006
31027 2014-07-22T22:46:40 xeldal2 1 410 0.10000 BTSX 1255 0.01
31028 2014-07-22T22:46:50 emski 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1245 0.006001
31029 2014-07-22T22:47:00 fox 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1235 0.005
MISSED 2014-07-22T22:47:10 viv N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
31030 2014-07-22T22:47:20 calabiyau 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1215 0.007
31031 2014-07-22T22:47:30 delegate-baozi 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1205 0.006
31032 2014-07-22T22:47:40 bits 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1195 0.006
31033 2014-07-22T22:47:50 init85 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1185 0.006001
MISSED 2014-07-22T22:48:00 btsdac-delegate N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
31034 2014-07-22T22:48:10 needle 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1166 0.006
31035 2014-07-22T22:48:20 webber-delegate 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1156 0.006
31036 2014-07-22T22:48:30 init42 1 359 0.10015 BTSX 1146 0.008001
31037 2014-07-22T22:48:40 init44 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1136 0.006
31038 2014-07-22T22:48:50 clout-delegate3 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1126 0.006001
31039 2014-07-22T22:49:00 bts500 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1116 0.005
31040 2014-07-22T22:49:10 charity-delegate-3 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1106 0.006001
31041 2014-07-22T22:49:20 zhangliangying 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1096 0.006001
31042 2014-07-22T22:49:30 angel-delegate 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1086 0.007
31043 2014-07-22T22:49:40 bts500dao 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1076 0.005
31044 2014-07-22T22:49:50 init53 1 410 0.10000 BTSX 1066 0.008001
31045 2014-07-22T22:50:00 init4 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1056 0.005
MISSED 2014-07-22T22:50:10 mister N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
31046 2014-07-22T22:50:20 lotto-delegate 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1036 0.006
31047 2014-07-22T22:50:30 cgafeng-delegate 1 410 0.10000 BTSX 1026 0.009001
31048 2014-07-22T22:50:40 dc-delegate 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1016 0.006
31049 2014-07-22T22:50:50 skyscraperfarms 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 1006 0.006
31050 2014-07-22T22:51:00 init26 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 996 0.006
31051 2014-07-22T22:51:10 init70 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 986 0.006
31052 2014-07-22T22:51:20 spartako2 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 976 0.006
31053 2014-07-22T22:51:30 maqifrnswa 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 966 0.005001
31054 2014-07-22T22:51:40 liondani 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 956 0.006
31055 2014-07-22T22:51:50 ak 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 946 0.005
31056 2014-07-22T22:52:00 spartako4 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 937 0.006001
31057 2014-07-22T22:52:10 init43 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 931 0.005
MISSED 2014-07-22T22:52:20 happyshares-4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
31058 2014-07-22T22:52:30 delegate-alt 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 911 0.007
31059 2014-07-22T22:52:40 delegate1-galt 1 395 0.10047 BTSX 901 0.013001
31060 2014-07-22T22:52:50 delegate.adam 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 891 0.007
31061 2014-07-22T22:53:00 jabbajabba 0 166 0.00000 BTSX 881 0.011001
-
Man, are you running delegate in GUI? Besides, It might lock unexpectedly.
-
Man, are you running delegate in GUI? Besides, It might lock unexpectedly.
Actually I have a server with linux mint 17 64bit ,16GB ram, 80 GB SSD + 3860 GB NAS WD HDD, Intel Pentium CPU G3220 @ 3.00GHx2, ASUS RADEON R9-280X , UPS (+NTP time installed)
And a second WIN 7 system that runs in parallel with that, with same delegates activated on both, to play around with the GUI :P
-
Man, are you running delegate in GUI? Besides, It might lock unexpectedly.
Actually I have a server with linux mint 17 64bit ,16GB ram, 80 GB SSD + 3860 GB NAS WD HDD, Intel Pentium CPU G3220 @ 3.00GHx2, ASUS RADEON R9-280X , UPS (+NTP time installed)
And a second WIN 7 system that runs in parallel with that, with same delegates activated on both, to play around with the GUI :P
You are not supposed to enable delegates on 2 separate machines.
From what I see it looks like you are on a fork.
Some of the delegates you list as missing blocks have 100% participation on my end.
-
This might answer some of the questions:
31022
b6ae7f37c018c2d362ad11e14b2f11378ba48c36 bitsharesx-delegate 0 166 2014-07-22T22:46:00 0 YES YES
96bc369a7343762d4ef981af5e926ebce41b5ef5 liondani 0 166 2014-07-22T22:51:40 9 N/A NO
and rise another few...
-
and rise another few...
I think I know what you mean... That's a big problem!
-
So that means delegates with "bad behavior" will get better statistics (reliability) than the "good" ones...
I mean when a delegate owner has enabled all delegates on 5 different servers he will probably never "miss" a block (high reliability) but create many forks... (Am I missing something?)
PS By the way I disabled my delegates on the second server
Sorry for the inconvenience...
PS2 I was on the original main chain on both systems... :-\
-
You forget that forks are known to all participants .. once we see you sign two different blocks with the same key we can un-approve you!
AFAIK that's what BM means by auto-voting/auto-kicking ... it's just not implemented yet ..
BTW. I have a second VM running which monitors my missed blocks and activates the backup if necesarry ..
current issues:
- if I just miss 1 block the backup machine goes online and my delegates produce forks
- if the host machine goes down (power supply) also the backup is down ... can fix this with a second dedicated/VM somewhere else once i have the time and a little money earned ..
-
You forget that forks are known to all participants .. once we see you sign two different blocks with the same key we can un-approve you!
AFAIK that's what BM means by auto-voting/auto-kicking ... it's just not implemented yet ..
BTW. I have a second VM running which monitors my missed blocks and activates the backup if necesarry ..
current issues:
- if I just miss 1 block the backup machine goes online and my delegates produce forks
- if the host machine goes down (power supply) also the backup is down ... can fix this with a second dedicated/VM somewhere else once i have the time and a little money earned ..
Your second machine shouldn't monitor the missed blocks. It should monitor the running state of the main machine (is it online? is the client running?).
This is because if you are just checking the missed blocks you might still end up with both backup and the original running and signing blocks. (If the reason for missing block is for example network delay).
-
You forget that forks are known to all participants .. once we see you sign two different blocks with the same key we can un-approve you!
AFAIK that's what BM means by auto-voting/auto-kicking ... it's just not implemented yet ..
BTW. I have a second VM running which monitors my missed blocks and activates the backup if necesarry ..
current issues:
- if I just miss 1 block the backup machine goes online and my delegates produce forks
- if the host machine goes down (power supply) also the backup is down ... can fix this with a second dedicated/VM somewhere else once i have the time and a little money earned ..
Your second machine shouldn't monitor the missed blocks. It should monitor the running state of the main machine (is it online? is the client running?).
This is because if you are just checking the missed blocks you might still end up with both backup and the original running and signing blocks. (If the reason for missing block is for example network delay).
you could activate the backup if lost x blocks in a row (for example x=10)
Then it would be activated the most times for the right reasons... It will not be a big deal to miss 10 blocks or so if you already have produced 1000+ blocks. And your delegates will not be in risk for auto-firing because they created to many forks...
-
You forget that forks are known to all participants .. once we see you sign two different blocks with the same key we can un-approve you!
AFAIK that's what BM means by auto-voting/auto-kicking ... it's just not implemented yet ..
BTW. I have a second VM running which monitors my missed blocks and activates the backup if necesarry ..
current issues:
- if I just miss 1 block the backup machine goes online and my delegates produce forks
- if the host machine goes down (power supply) also the backup is down ... can fix this with a second dedicated/VM somewhere else once i have the time and a little money earned ..
Your second machine shouldn't monitor the missed blocks. It should monitor the running state of the main machine (is it online? is the client running?).
This is because if you are just checking the missed blocks you might still end up with both backup and the original running and signing blocks. (If the reason for missing block is for example network delay).
you could activate the backup if lost x blocks in a row (for example x=10)
Then it would be activated the most times for the right reasons... It will not be a big deal to miss 10 blocks or so if you already have produced 1000+ blocks. And your delegates will not be in risk for auto-firing because they created to many forks...
This is also wrong. You shouldn't rely on the missed blocks at all. Your backup should check the running state of the actual machine by another means. You should make sure it has stopped and/or it has no network connection at all (this might be extremely tricky).
In the scenario where you have the backup checking for missed blocks:
1 Imagine the reason for missed blocks is temporary network/hardware issue (DDOS, someone torrenting porn, switch failure, process taking too much CPU etc).
2 Imagine your backup starts producing blocks.
3 Imagine 1 is fixed (DDOS stops, porn is downloaded, switch is restarted, process finishes...)
The result will be again 2 running delegates creating forks.
-
this is just a temporary solution until i settled in Sweden .. gonna move tomorrow ..
I want to upgrade the backup script such that it enables all delegates, connectes to the other machine and disables all delegates again .. plus writes a mail so that I can investigate
Just a quick-and-dirty precaution to prevent what happened yesterday while I was at a funeral
The final thing will probably totally different
-
I just updated my script .. I need to now miss 10 or more blocks for the backup to even become active! just FYI