v0.10.12.x RC4 Testing
- Thread starter eduffield
- Start date
- Status
Better would be to group transactions windows explorer style, +/- symbol woukd expand/collapse
Well, filter is much easier to implement imo and it's quite common to use already
Another suggestion: balance on Send tab should reflect the type of funds selected to send i.e. "Use Anonymous Funds" -> Anonymized balance, "Use Non-Anonymous Funds" -> Total Balance - Anonymized balance (or smth like that), "No Preference" -> Total Balance
eduffield
Core Developer
Masternodes are protected by the code. We actually haven't had any problems with that.
JGCMiner
Active member
I am probably just confused, but does this mean that regardless of the current number of available masternodes only the best 20 are used for anonymization?
flare
Well-known member
I think MangledBlue is referring to "fund splitting": currently there is no way to keep the wallet from splitting your funds (especially the 1000DRK vin).
FundSplit() even ignores the "lock unspent" settings atm.
flare
Well-known member
Not the 20 "best"
There is a rank list for masternode selection, which changes each block as the first entry is removed. From this rank list the top 20 are used to do the mixing. The more masternodes in the network, the longer the rank list
Code:
$ darkcoind masternode current
50.191.199.127:19999
$ darkcoind masternode list rank | grep : | awk '{ print $3, $1}' | sort -V
1, "50.191.199.127:19999"
2, "54.208.138.69:19999"
3, "188.226.248.36:19999"
4, "54.191.87.83:19999"
5, "54.191.236.39:19999"
6, "54.92.19.72:19999"
7, "54.183.79.141:19999"
8, "184.73.179.235:19999"
9, "149.255.109.167:19999"
10, "188.226.223.5:19999"
11, "184.73.179.187:19999"
12, "184.73.179.196:19999"
13 "211.99.224.173:19999"
14, "92.222.10.179:19999"
15, "209.222.30.51:19999"
16, "54.179.187.196:19999"
17, "184.73.179.148:19999"eduffield : correct me if i am wrong.
eduffield
Core Developer
Masternode operators: If you own 198.50.148.87, can you send me your debug.log pls? Your node charged a collateral transaction that it shouldn't have. [email protected]
Thanks
Thanks
eduffield
Core Developer
Ah, yeah that code would try to use the 1000DRK. I just added code to not use DoAutomaticDenominating for masternodes
chaeplin
Well-known member
Which is
mzWRw88FSQXBAfCNF9hqLHMkuCtEfCXQBW OVH Hosting Canada
gone off at block 10511
Code:
10509.txt:mzWRw88FSQXBAfCNF9hqLHMkuCtEfCXQBW d0510bc11a217e4230154fd760086d68518eea24 198.50.148.87:19999 1 1407396349981699 130 9015
10510.txt:mzWRw88FSQXBAfCNF9hqLHMkuCtEfCXQBW d0510bc11a217e4230154fd760086d68518eea24 198.50.148.87:19999 1 1407396349981699 618 9015
10511.txt:mzWRw88FSQXBAfCNF9hqLHMkuCtEfCXQBW d0510bc11a217e4230154fd760086d68518eea24 198.50.148.87:19999 0 0 1407397775 -1407387334
10512.txt:mzWRw88FSQXBAfCNF9hqLHMkuCtEfCXQBW d0510bc11a217e4230154fd760086d68518eea24 198.50.148.87:19999 0 0 1407398056 -1407387334
Propulsion
The buck stops here.
So my wallet still has yet to denominate a single darkcoin. The 30.60's are MN payments. The 1000 darkcoins are from the faucet.
Anything I'm missing here?
v0.10.12.16-beta
Edit: I also just noticed that the wallet has locked the non original address MN balance to use as the Masternode.
JGCMiner
Active member
Got it. Thanks. :smile:Not the 20 "best"
There is a rank list for masternode selection, which changes each block as the first entry is removed. From this rank list the top 20 are used to do the mixing. The more masternodes in the network, the longer the rank list
Code:$ darkcoind masternode current 50.191.199.127:19999 $ darkcoind masternode list rank | grep : | awk '{ print $3, $1}' | sort -V 1, "50.191.199.127:19999" 2, "54.208.138.69:19999" 3, "188.226.248.36:19999" 4, "54.191.87.83:19999" 5, "54.191.236.39:19999" 6, "54.92.19.72:19999" 7, "54.183.79.141:19999" 8, "184.73.179.235:19999" 9, "149.255.109.167:19999" 10, "188.226.223.5:19999" 11, "184.73.179.187:19999" 12, "184.73.179.196:19999" 13 "211.99.224.173:19999" 14, "92.222.10.179:19999" 15, "209.222.30.51:19999" 16, "54.179.187.196:19999" 17, "184.73.179.148:19999"
eduffield : correct me if i am wrong.
eduffield
Core Developer
I've been working on setting a target amount for Darksend to denominate and it turns out to be a giant problem. What if the wallet just disables darksend by default for more than say 5000DRK, which you could override if you wanted to. It would also give a popup error saying "Darksend is not designed to run with more than 5000DRK in a wallet, to use darksend please make a new wallet with less than that amount" or something
Propulsion
The buck stops here.
Not many people will have more than 5000DRK. Shouldn't be an issue.
JGCMiner
Active member
I guess if it can be disabled by the user than any limit is OK, but ... whats' the problem with letting it run for any amount( i.e without the troublesome target setting as is the case now)?
Fees? Time required? Bloat?
Last edited by a moderator:
To be precise, there are less than 87 people who have more than 5k DRK. The actual number could be even less if we consider possibility that one person owns more than one address in the top100 rich-list. http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/#!rich
vertoe
Three of Nine
Money gets stuck. I have a wallet with 300k tDRK fully denominated through 9 rounds and I'm not able to move even 10% out of it due to a "Transaction too large" issue.
- Status