Author Topic: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure  (Read 5700 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline netdragonx

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2018, 07:33:56 am »
Excited to see these deployed and what it'll mean for performance.

If you need any help, let me know. I've managed HAProxy clusters in the past.
twitter: @mattbeckman
steemit: netdragonx
telegram: @mattbeckman

Offline memunix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #31 on: January 22, 2018, 08:45:02 am »
This node appears to be down since yesterday at least (the first time I had looked)

https://eu.nodes.bitshares.works/

Code: [Select]
11 eof_exception: End Of File
stringstream
    {}
    th_a  sstream.cpp:109 peek

    {"str":""}
    th_a  json.cpp:478 from_string

Offline blockchainprojectsbv

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2018, 09:18:35 am »
Yes, that is correct.

If you want to use it within the online wallet you need to connect via
wss://eu.nodes.bitshares.works

We will do a pull request once all nodes are running, then it will appear in the online wallet as one of the default nodes.

Best regards,
   Stefan Schießl
   Blockchain Projects BV

Offline memunix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #33 on: January 22, 2018, 12:50:49 pm »
Yes, that works. Thanks  :)

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12636
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #34 on: January 23, 2018, 08:18:22 am »
The Opening Post has been updated with the first available endpoints
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline dexant

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2018, 03:11:50 am »
Can you please update nodes to latest core build with candle-brush fix  ;)

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12636
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2018, 04:03:43 pm »
Can you please update nodes to latest core build with candle-brush fix  ;)
That's what we are doing currently ..
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline Thul3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #37 on: February 16, 2018, 09:28:21 pm »
In my opinion we need way more nodes.Everytime the market is hot i get only high latency nodes with 4000-8000 ms where its a pain to make any transactions.Its like 10-30 failed transaction before one goes through.
Its really a pain and i lost personly a lot of money because of these kind of lags on hot days.
So i build my own personal node to have a good connection guarantee because these are the days where you make good profit.
But knowing these issues and me wanting DEX to get a major player this issue needs to be fixed quickly since i heard from many mad traders to leave DEX because of the bad performance.

Offline Brekyrself

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #38 on: February 16, 2018, 10:54:00 pm »
In my opinion we need way more nodes.Everytime the market is hot i get only high latency nodes with 4000-8000 ms where its a pain to make any transactions.Its like 10-30 failed transaction before one goes through.
Its really a pain and i lost personly a lot of money because of these kind of lags on hot days.
So i build my own personal node to have a good connection guarantee because these are the days where you make good profit.
But knowing these issues and me wanting DEX to get a major player this issue needs to be fixed quickly since i heard from many mad traders to leave DEX because of the bad performance.


Is there any clean and clear documentation were you able to follow for running your own node?

Offline Thul3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #39 on: February 16, 2018, 11:08:56 pm »
Yes .....i'm currently on holiday and not on my home pc but you can ask the guy marko who created the proposal for dex trading bot.He wrote a clear instruction how to setup your own node.

Offline valtr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2018, 04:52:24 pm »
In my opinion we need way more nodes.Everytime the market is hot i get only high latency nodes with 4000-8000 ms where its a pain to make any transactions.Its like 10-30 failed transaction before one goes through.
Its really a pain and i lost personly a lot of money because of these kind of lags on hot days.
So i build my own personal node to have a good connection guarantee because these are the days where you make good profit.
But knowing these issues and me wanting DEX to get a major player this issue needs to be fixed quickly since i heard from many mad traders to leave DEX because of the bad performance.


Is there any clean and clear documentation were you able to follow for running your own node?
Try this https://steemit.com/bitshares/@markopaasila/how-to-create-your-own-bitshares-node-for-better-access-to-the-dex

Online sschiessl

Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2018, 05:36:25 pm »
We are still investigating what the cause is there. But one.thing we see its likely not a problem with performance at the backend because the servers were basically bored, even through such heavy "out of sync" periods. It might be an issue with client/server connection management.

The cause needs to be identified, setting up your own node is treating the symptom (but of course us a work around atm)
« Last Edit: February 17, 2018, 07:30:12 pm by sschiessl »

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #42 on: February 21, 2018, 11:33:53 pm »
We are still investigating what the cause is there. But one.thing we see its likely not a problem with performance at the backend because the servers were basically bored, even through such heavy "out of sync" periods. It might be an issue with client/server connection management.

The cause needs to be identified, setting up your own node is treating the symptom (but of course us a work around atm)

This needs to be a priority at the moment. Potential users are flowing into the community faster than ever thanks to the Network Effect and first impressions are key.
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline blockchainprojectsbv

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #43 on: February 27, 2018, 09:51:35 am »
We have summarized our development efforts now in this final report.

Main post is also updated.

Offline Digital Lucifer

Re: [Worker] Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure
« Reply #44 on: February 28, 2018, 10:07:33 pm »
We have summarized our development efforts now in this final report.

Main post is also updated.

Hello to both Blockchain Projects BV and younger accidental brother Blockchain BV, as well as ChainSquad GMBH. Since you've posted your final report, and until now as we all know, there was nobody around to do review on your work as you're doing on others, i was happy to step up and p by doing pro-bono review of your delivery since it would be too centralized that Blockchain Projects BV getting reviewed by itself in another form known as Bitshares Foundation, as it was the case in the past.

[NOTICE]: Since CEO of the Blockchain BV and Blockchain Projects BV is at the same time being hired/funded by the blockchain to represents Bitshares interests as spokeperson, and Dr. Stefan Schießl is software engineer not a Project Manager/CTO, to completely remove any possible conflict of interests, i would request politely that @xeroc (Dr. Ing. Fabian Schuh), as the CTO of the company hired by the blockchain, be collaborative and provide explanations on certain details of this review in transparent way to stake-holders who upvoted his offer/worker proposal as presented first time in early December 2017.

Review of the ORIGINAL PROPOSAL and ROADMAP

http://www.bitshares.foundation/worker/budget/2017-12-infrastructure ( offtopic - you're missing ssl on bitshares.foundation domain )

Highlights and requirements (blue) for clarifications:

1) Distributed Network of BitShares
"The core component of this proposal is the distribution of the BitShares network by means of deploying multiple nodes and offer public API endpoints to improve latency, robustness and availability for the BitShares ecosystem. Since this proposal is funded by the BitShares ecosystem, we limit the use of the APIs to non-commercial activity."

Q) Please explain in which way exactly and/or how you limited the use/usage of the API to non-commercial one ?

2) Public nodes with load balancer in the U.S. on separate servers for redundancy
"a. Deploy two BitShares nodes on a cloud hosting service located in the U.S.
b. Deploy a loadbalancer controlling the traffic to the two new nodes on a cloud
hosting service located in the U.S."

Q) Why balancer and nodes are keep rebooting ? Uptime is not even a day, and downtime is not even an hour. - https://us.nodes.bitshares.ws/stats
Q) us.nodes.bitshares.ws resolves to 96.126.96.40 - Let's encrypt SSL deployed on it doesn't have a valid CA Root certificate, by presenting itself to potential visitor/user as not being trusted by all browsers. At the same time by checking bitshares.eu it does return properly installed SSL. Why ?
Q) On the invoices presented there is no transparent way to know which node is this, please clarify in the future proposals and reports to the community. Since I've been keen enough to do whois against IP, i've discovered that provider is Linode. Can you please clarify which node from the Linode invoices are these 3 ? Load balancer + 2.
Q) Could you please disclose location of the 2 deployed nodes ? In the current infrastructure problem, redundancy was not important as solution on the single location how much decreasing latency and new availability on more locations having balancer in front.


3) Support SSL encryption on the load balancers
"a. Free letsencrypt certificate is used
b. Upgrade to a premium SSL certificate, if necessary"

Comment: Wildcard SSL by Comodo/Positive is roughly around 250$, even though you stated price 800$ (no reason for it). We have inbound price for the same Wildcard a bit over 100$. It would cover all servers/subdomains under that domain for 1 year giving it full encryption and insurance policy. This was offered and discussed publicly in DEX channel earlier 2017. It covers all sub-domains and the main domain without expiry and stronger encryption chain as live certificate. Free SSL is not same as paid SSL, and im sure you are well aware since you are having highest degree of education and positioned as CTO of the Blockchain company managing DAC business after all. We are not running darkweb or home based servers that we can't afford cost of real SSL for all.



REVIEW OF FINAL REPORT

1) Test deployment and loadbalanced nodes
" Internal testing is completed and connection reliability is monitored. There is a
connection issue with the web wallet (“Node out of sync”) that has to be investigated,
but the nodes seem to be unaffected by this issue (no significant load when such
connection issues appear). There might be a connection management problem
inside the backend or the web wallet, but this lies outside the scope of this worker. "

Q) Who is responsible as authority/person to overview and review work being done by Worker Bill Butler ? - Offtopic, but related to the integrity of authority being responsible.

2) Public nodes with load balancer in Asia on separate servers for redundancy
"Two machines are deployed, which is a change to the original plan . One runs the
loadbalancer and one runs a normal node."

Q) Is it truth that adding load balancer in front of a single node will not do nothing except increasing latency by adding additional hop in front to the node ?
Q) Since worker proposal is being approved as written/offered by stake-holders and based on initial goal, please clarify who approved change to reduce original proposal from 3 servers to 2 for Asia and to waste resources ?
Q) Why balancer and nodes are keep rebooting ? Uptime is not even a day, and downtime is not even an hour. - https://sg.nodes.bitshares.ws/stats
Q) sg.nodes.bitshares.ws resolves to 172.104.167.98 and Let's Encrypt SSL deployed is missing CA Root certificate on the domain. Why ?


3) "If traffic increases significantly on this loadbalancer, additional nodes can be
deployed. This was a cost-benefit decision due to the price of asian dedicated hosts"

Q) Please clear on Linode's invoice which nodes are Asian ones/specified by ip.
Q) You are using excuse under the "price of asian dedicated hosts" while you are running cloud instance on Linode. Can you please be more clear on the actual reason of decreasing/leaving original roadmap/project ?



- Please be kind and clarify which node is running which IP and belongs to which invoice.
- Please be kind and explain what is legal relation with company ChainSquad gmbH presenting email printed reviews with its own stamp on it ? Isn't responsible party for the worker proposal Blockchain Projects BV ?
- Please be kind how from Infrastructure Urgent proposal additional milestone is related to infrastructure ( faucet ) and why it was primarily deployed as priority while even worker proposal approved infrastructure was started in February.
- Please clarify is Hetzner (invoice R0007759821) additional milestone for EU and who approved it ?

Finance/Payment review

http://www.bitshares.foundation/download/invoices/201712-infrastructure/20180216-Factuur%202018-4.pdf

You've asked for 3300 USD regarding one-time setup. Initial setup of infrastructure started in January and it was not fully operational by February since unexpected downtime happened at your initial deployment.

If your ONE-TIME setup had a period of 1 month, and you haven't delivered any eta on days/hours by setting fixed price, as taken from your own report i would be suggesting that you refund 1 of the 2 month (QTY) payments you've charged for the management of the infrastructure since you've been managing it only February (period after initial cost/setup), before this escalate more.

I also will hit reminder that having centralized autonomy, power, invoicing to yourself, approving changes and reviewing it yourself, changing proposals as you go without consent of each stake-holder, or moving funds in resources never approved was not something that i was expecting from someone who should set example on the blockchain.

Overall is that you are charging more than you are doing, lack of interest on long-term solutions (SSL example above), lack of professionalism (You spent 3 weeks to deploy 5 nodes and 3 are having broken SSL, but you've done Testing ), you are doing what was never agreed to be done, there is no serious reporting and your own KPI failed by the nodes status in first month as well as current up-time overall.

Many thanks for clarifications and answers, community is waiting patiently.


« Last Edit: February 28, 2018, 10:14:41 pm by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (Mike) Preocanin - General Manager @ Syntek Solutions
TOANDI Co., LTD. (BOI Approved) - TAX ID: 0205549016913 - 95/5 Moo 4 Siam Country Club Rd.
Nong Prue, Bang Lamung, Chonburi 20250, Thailand.