M
MangledBlue
Guest
Moli is suppose to be sending me 35 DRK so I can test small amt's
(and then she needs to stop sending me DRK - lol)
(and then she needs to stop sending me DRK - lol)
v0.10.12.x RC4 Testing
- Thread starter eduffield
- Start date
- Status
moli
Well-known member
Tante, hm ok so I closed the wallet only one time and got charged with 3 Collateral fees, but why? and what do they do with these fees?That's just really bazaar. There must be a hidden transaction somewhere, but I can't find it! Have you tried sending the whole balance to someone, or another one of your wallets? It may error out? The coins have to be "real" and exist on the blockchain, so if something is wrong with the reporting, it should not allow you to send them. Want to give that a try? Here is my address, if you want to give it a go, I'll send 'em back to you thenmyA9PyN8dLzbNxvvMwTmELS2kWg26gbnX7
And Blue, I still have yet to be charged for a transaction, weird!
Moli, yes, if you closed your wallet while it was being denominated (and you can't tell if it's happening, only if it's NOT happening, because it locks up again when finished) yes, you will get collateral fees. I'm trying to get collateral fees, but I guess I'm closing my wallet before anything is in the mixer all the time, LOL.
M
MangledBlue
Guest
Fee's go to the Darkcoin Bounty Fund
It is a bit bizarro. My best guess is that somehow I have received someone else's 900 Drks during mixing process somehow.That's just really bazaar. There must be a hidden transaction somewhere, but I can't find it! Have you tried sending the whole balance to someone, or another one of your wallets? It may error out? The coins have to be "real" and exist on the blockchain, so if something is wrong with the reporting, it should not allow you to send them. Want to give that a try? Here is my address, if you want to give it a go, I'll send 'em back to you then
Edit: I have sent the funds to you Tante but it doesn't show up: http://test.explorer.darkcoin.qa/tx/77981d35b89f4d2955b69f5a5fa759e84f905663b94ca48f27378bf1ea6b0987
Edit2: Or my wallet.dat is corrupted.
Last edited by a moderator:
qwizzie
Well-known member
A few questions about intended collateral fees :
As i understand you get collateral fees if you close wallet / loose pc power / loose internet-connection / be a bad actor in some form (any other reasons ?) while your wallet was being denominated. For the average joe who isnt aware of the above and who is getting hit by these collateral fees (in fact getting hit several times, draining the total amount) how can he/she
avoid keep getting hit with collateral fees once they are in that situation ? Do they need to resync the blockchain ? Can they somehow stop the wallet denomination to avoid getting hit and hit and hit ? Will those intended collateral fees stop out of themselves at some point ? (as default is 2 rounds of denomination can we exspect to be hit only a certain amount of collateral fees ?)
Maybe we could give users clear instructions within the wallet what to do when that user is getting hit with intended collateral fees ?
As i understand you get collateral fees if you close wallet / loose pc power / loose internet-connection / be a bad actor in some form (any other reasons ?) while your wallet was being denominated. For the average joe who isnt aware of the above and who is getting hit by these collateral fees (in fact getting hit several times, draining the total amount) how can he/she
avoid keep getting hit with collateral fees once they are in that situation ? Do they need to resync the blockchain ? Can they somehow stop the wallet denomination to avoid getting hit and hit and hit ? Will those intended collateral fees stop out of themselves at some point ? (as default is 2 rounds of denomination can we exspect to be hit only a certain amount of collateral fees ?)
Maybe we could give users clear instructions within the wallet what to do when that user is getting hit with intended collateral fees ?
Last edited by a moderator:
moli
Well-known member
Hey in the real world if you happen to get extra DRK in your wallet, just keep them
lolI've counted the tdrk in my wallet, the calculation seems correct. I think if you just delete everything except the conf file and start over, see if you will get extra drk again lol. OH and make sure to send the tdrk back to the faucet
Found the issue. The wallet.dat appears to have been corrupted. So I ran -salvagewallet and it seems to have fixed up the problem.Hey in the real world if you happen to get extra DRK in your wallet, just keep them
I've counted the tdrk in my wallet, the calculation seems correct. I think if you just delete everything except the conf file and start over, see if you will get extra drk again lol. OH and make sure to send the tdrk back to the faucet
moli
Well-known member
What does "-salvagewallet" do? BTW, did you use the same wallet.dat for several qt versions? I'm curious too as how you got extra drk. And scary thought in my mind.. what if the mixing can create a different address and send your coins to a wrong address? Maybe Evan can explain better.
Yes. To prevent DDOS but I was thinking even with 10,000 wallets - the system is capable of handling that.
From here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22389442/bitcoin-wallet-dat-corrupt-salvage-failed
"You need to run the client with the -salvagewallet command-line option which moves any existing wallet.dat to wallet.[timestamp].dat and then attempts to salvage public/private keys and master encryption keys (if the wallet is encrypted) into a new wallet.dat. Once you have your keys in place you can import them into a fresh copy of bitcoin and recover your balance."
After running, it recreated the wallet.dat for me and all was well. Back to original balance.
Edit: Wallet still not denominating.
2014-08-07 06:07:37 CDarkSendPool::SendMoney() - Added transaction to pool.
2014-08-07 06:07:37 Closing masternode connection 211.99.224.173:19999
2014-08-07 06:07:37 disconnecting node 211.99.224.173:19999
2014-08-07 06:07:37 RelayDarkSendIn - found master, relaying message - 184.73.179.187:19999
2014-08-07 06:07:37 DoAutomaticDenominating : Running darksend denominate. Return ''
2014-08-07 06:07:37 CDarkSendPool::UpdateState() == 2 | 2
2014-08-07 06:07:37 DarkSendStatusUpdate - state: 2 entriesCount: 1 accepted: 1 error:
2014-08-07 06:07:37 CDarkSendPool::StatusUpdate - set sessionID to 452756
2014-08-07 06:07:37 CDarkSendPool::StatusUpdate - entry accepted!
2014-08-07 06:07:38 DoAutomaticDenominating : Running darksend denominate. Return 'Error: You already have pending entries in the Darksend pool'
2014-08-07 06:07:38 DoAutomaticDenominating : Error running denominate, Error: You already have pending entries in the Darksend pool
2014-08-07 06:07:38 darkSend Status => Your transaction was accepted into the pool!
2014-08-07 06:07:38 CDarkSendPool::UpdateState() == 2 | 2
2014-08-07 06:07:38 DarkSendStatusUpdate - state: 2 entriesCount: 1 accepted: -1 error:
2014-08-07 06:07:39 Flushing wallet.dat
2014-08-07 06:07:39 Flushed wallet.dat 47ms
2014-08-07 06:07:41 darkSend Status => ( Entries 1/2 )
2014-08-07 06:07:53 CDarkSendPool::CheckTimeout() : REMOVING EXPIRED ENTRY - 0
Edit2: Sent entire balance of 5151 to new address in wallet. Now it is denominating.
Last edited by a moderator:
vertoe
Three of Nine
Sent
OK after some testing - I am hoping there can be some further optimisation to the inputs that are automatically selected when NOT using coin control to manually select inputs for darksend+.
1) I tried to darksend 26 tDRK to a brand new wallet and it asked me for a transaction fee.
2) I then found that when using the auto select of anon inputs, it would use the following inputs (10+10+1+1+1+1+1+1+1) which was causing it to be over the transaction size limit, hence the fee.
3) I then went in and manually selected the 100 tDark input. As its just a single input and under the transaction limit size there was no transaction fee.
Is it possible to update the logic in the code to try and avoid using multiple inputs to make up the send amount, which will cause transaction fee's? A transaction fee should only be required when there are no other single inputs to use and has to combine multiple.
1) I tried to darksend 26 tDRK to a brand new wallet and it asked me for a transaction fee.
2) I then found that when using the auto select of anon inputs, it would use the following inputs (10+10+1+1+1+1+1+1+1) which was causing it to be over the transaction size limit, hence the fee.
3) I then went in and manually selected the 100 tDark input. As its just a single input and under the transaction limit size there was no transaction fee.
Is it possible to update the logic in the code to try and avoid using multiple inputs to make up the send amount, which will cause transaction fee's? A transaction fee should only be required when there are no other single inputs to use and has to combine multiple.
Also - the fresh wallet I just sent the 26tDRK with above, just got hit with collateral bug - Just sent you the wallet.dat and debug.log Evan
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status