BitShares Forum
Other => Graveyard => BitShares PTS => Topic started by: Amazon on May 28, 2014, 01:36:03 am
-
We had 7 blocks in the past 18 hours. There is only one transaction per block.... Miners are rejecting to include valid tx?
-
We had 7 blocks in the past 18 hours. There is only one transaction per block.... Miners are rejecting to include valid tx?
Caused by transfer fee zero?
-
Finally a block included transactions...
this pool is good: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PrrtrqsqSi1nVpBwer46WaY4x9kr1Cw9fA
this pool is bad: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PpXRMhz5dDHtFYpbDTpiAMJaVarMUJURT6
Though the "bad" pool is excluding even its own transactions. Any idea who owns what? I emailed ypool and but can't find contact info for beeeeer.org
-
coinplorer showed the new block like 15 minutes before agexplorer, and my client still doesn't see it. Is the network split? Anyone know what's up?
-
Finally a block included transactions...
this pool is good: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PrrtrqsqSi1nVpBwer46WaY4x9kr1Cw9fA
this pool is bad: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PpXRMhz5dDHtFYpbDTpiAMJaVarMUJURT6
Though the "bad" pool is excluding even its own transactions. Any idea who owns what? I emailed ypool and but can't find contact info for beeeeer.org
The problem is with the ypool miners which are all derived from https://github.com/jh000/jhProtominer.git
Specifically, if the miners are still running without these 3 fixes (which is likely for the older optimized forks)
commit bc32c370ecdf93d3d21b14029694b99c2ea9ae56
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Sat Nov 23 18:31:16 2013 +0100
Better transaction handling
commit 2bc39593dad391353a68adb5bfe6b950da268800
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Wed Nov 20 02:43:05 2013 +0100
Interrupt on new work
The miner now stops processing the current work when a new block
appears.
commit 151634efd03d3e07fda5d701e0da337ef5b98aef
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Tue Nov 19 00:53:37 2013 +0100
Critical transaction fix
Fixed a little bug that made it impossible for the xpt pool server to
generate valid blocks that contain non-coinbase transactions.
-
I especially like this comment in the ptsminer for beeeeer.org https://github.com/thbaumbach/ptsminer.git (which appears to have been based on the jhProtominer but looks like it's been mostly rewritten)
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 526) std::cout << "********************************************" << std::endl;
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 527) std::cout << "*** ptsminer - Pts Pool Miner v" << VERSION_MAJOR << "." << VERSION_MINOR << " " << VERSION_EXT
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 528) std::cout << "*** by xolokram/TB - www.beeeeer.org - glhf" << std::endl;
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 529) //std::cout << "*** thanks to jh00, testix & Co." << std::endl; //...for no transactions in the network? pff!
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 530) std::cout << "***" << std::endl;
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 531) std::cout << "*** press CTRL+C to exit" << std::endl;
acecb9b0 (Thomas Baumbach 2013-11-21 20:18:32 +0100 532) std::cout << "********************************************" << std::endl;
-
coinplorer showed the new block like 15 minutes before agexplorer, and my client still doesn't see it. Is the network split? Anyone know what's up?
agexplorer updates every 10 minutes or more.
-
hope dpos
-
你好，我们的矿池程序是贵币刚刚发布时连夜赶制出来的，没有实现 merkleroot 计算，因此无法确认交易，谢谢。
-
Before we move to DPOS, should 3I use AGS FUND to mine PTS? If not, I am afraid the whole pts network will not be functional. The PTS amount for AGS was only 407 for yesterday, because many transactions were not confirmed.
@bytermaster @stan
-
Before we move to DPOS, should 3I use AGS FUND to mine PTS? If not, I am afraid the whole pts network will not be functional. The PTS amount for AGS was only 407 for yesterday, because many transactions were not confirmed.
@bytermaster @stan
The problem wasn't that there weren't miners, but that many miners had a buggy version. Block time is still around 3 hours. OFC still very long, but manageable.
-
This is exactly why I vote to POS/DPOS.
-
This is exactly why I vote to POS/DPOS.
+5%
-
Finally a block included transactions...
this pool is good: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PrrtrqsqSi1nVpBwer46WaY4x9kr1Cw9fA
this pool is bad: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PpXRMhz5dDHtFYpbDTpiAMJaVarMUJURT6
Though the "bad" pool is excluding even its own transactions. Any idea who owns what? I emailed ypool and but can't find contact info for beeeeer.org
The problem is with the ypool miners which are all derived from https://github.com/jh000/jhProtominer.git
Specifically, if the miners are still running without these 3 fixes (which is likely for the older optimized forks)
commit bc32c370ecdf93d3d21b14029694b99c2ea9ae56
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Sat Nov 23 18:31:16 2013 +0100
Better transaction handling
commit 2bc39593dad391353a68adb5bfe6b950da268800
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Wed Nov 20 02:43:05 2013 +0100
Interrupt on new work
The miner now stops processing the current work when a new block
appears.
commit 151634efd03d3e07fda5d701e0da337ef5b98aef
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Tue Nov 19 00:53:37 2013 +0100
Critical transaction fix
Fixed a little bug that made it impossible for the xpt pool server to
generate valid blocks that contain non-coinbase transactions.
NOT all miners derived from mentioned codebase. yam miner developed from scratch and uses minor part of protocol specific code developed by ypool owner jh00. That code DOES include fix (in fact, was first one to include fix). Versions without fix are explicitly blocked by ypool.
-
Finally a block included transactions...
this pool is good: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PrrtrqsqSi1nVpBwer46WaY4x9kr1Cw9fA
this pool is bad: https://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PpXRMhz5dDHtFYpbDTpiAMJaVarMUJURT6
Though the "bad" pool is excluding even its own transactions. Any idea who owns what? I emailed ypool and but can't find contact info for beeeeer.org
The problem is with the ypool miners which are all derived from https://github.com/jh000/jhProtominer.git
Specifically, if the miners are still running without these 3 fixes (which is likely for the older optimized forks)
commit bc32c370ecdf93d3d21b14029694b99c2ea9ae56
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Sat Nov 23 18:31:16 2013 +0100
Better transaction handling
commit 2bc39593dad391353a68adb5bfe6b950da268800
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Wed Nov 20 02:43:05 2013 +0100
Interrupt on new work
The miner now stops processing the current work when a new block
appears.
commit 151634efd03d3e07fda5d701e0da337ef5b98aef
Author: JH <jh@jhwork.net>
Date: Tue Nov 19 00:53:37 2013 +0100
Critical transaction fix
Fixed a little bug that made it impossible for the xpt pool server to
generate valid blocks that contain non-coinbase transactions.
Ooops, I think bitder is right. http://ptspool.com/ provided the link to an old jhProtominer build, which didn't include the critical transaction fix. I think yvg1900 can contact ptspool owner to update the link and urge miners to update as well.
ptspool provides a link to file store managed by me, so miners there shall be up to date. It is absolutely pointless to use jhProtominer, because of yam has MUCH better CPU mining performance, and I do not support optimized jhProtominer builds for a long time - all code moved to yam.
As far as I can recall, jhProtominer M7h version located at the link DOES include fix. I think the last buggy one was M7c. I definitely removed all buggy versions long before we agreed that ypool will explicitly block them (miners send miner version to the pool).
I will double-check what was in M7h build, but chances that it does not include fix are extremely low - fix was delivered on Nov 19, 2013, and M7h (last in jhProtominer lime) came out on Dec 07, 2013.
-
I will double-check what was in M7h build, but chances that it does not include fix are extremely low - fix was delivered on Nov 19, 2013, and M7h (last in jhProtominer lime) came out on Dec 07, 2013.
Thanks!
-
This is exactly why I vote to POS/DPOS.
+5%
PoS is the future probably, PoW is just unsustainable and troublesome