v0.10.12.x RC4 Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.

JGCMiner

Moderator
Moderator
Jun 8, 2014
360
211
113
I really hope that RC4 is not going to get shadow released in the middle of the night or something. For all the effort put into this by the dev team and the community on testnet it would be a shame to have the rhetoric be about the way it was launched. The professional thing to do is give a notification of a the launch date a day or two in advance so that people know that they should be ready to update their MNs.

Just my 2duffs...
 

mbilker

Member
Aug 7, 2014
55
8
48
Yep, that's another possible solution. Has to be implemented though ;)
What about services that check for only one tx? It will be harder to implement if an automated service if there are multiple transactions.
 

elbereth

Active Member
Dash Support Group
Mar 25, 2014
440
466
133
Costa Rica
dashninja.pl
Dash Address
XkfkHqMnhvQovo7kXQjvnNiFnQhRNZYCsz
Once released, masternodes that haven't updated will not be paid anymore, instantly. So there will be a hurry and the ones that do it first, will get all of the first payments :)
What of the pools that will not update to the new version? If the enforce is not active they would still be paying the old masternode?
(I didn't update for 2 days, was still on .15 while network was on .16 and .17, and my tp2pool payee in block template was from my pool that wasn't updated)
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
So I guess what we are requesting, as masternode owners, is clear guidance about what to do and when.
 

eduffield

Core Developer
Mar 9, 2014
1,084
5,319
183
The technical background of the 5000 DRK limitation is, that with current denomination scheme (0.1 ; 1 ; 10 ; 100 ; 500) the tx scripts for sending amounts > 5000 DRK get to large (20k+) and will not be relayed/mined by miners.

Possible solutions are to

a) extend the scheme by additional denomination units (e.g. 1000 & 5000)
b) switch to different scheme:
- either binary scheme as proposed by Kristov Atlas ( 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + 32 + 64 + 128 + ...)
- or a optimized scheme as proposed by babygiraffe in https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-updates-july-7th.1735/#post-11434
Hmm? I'm not sure where you got this from, but it's not the case at all. The 5000DRK limit is a hard limit for the entire wallet. Lets say a user has 100k DRK, the wallet would actually end up making a bunch of 500DRK inputs and 100DRK inputs. The only reason I added the hard limit was because there's no easy way to denominate a portion of the wallet without doing the rest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

eduffield

Core Developer
Mar 9, 2014
1,084
5,319
183
What of the pools that will not update to the new version? If the enforce is not active they would still be paying the old masternode?
(I didn't update for 2 days, was still on .15 while network was on .16 and .17, and my tp2pool payee in block template was from my pool that wasn't updated)
Yeah, they'd pay the old masternode network until they updated.
 

superplus

New Member
Jul 29, 2014
18
5
3
Hmm? I'm not sure where you got this from, but it's not the case at all. The 5000DRK limit is for a hard limit for the entire wallet. Lets say a user has 100k DRK, the wallet would actually end up making a bunch of 500DRK inputs and 100DRK inputs. The only reason I added the hard limit was because there's no easy way to denominate a portion of the wallet without doing the rest.
so splitting in 5k pieces before denomination is not a solution right?
it was discussed on the previous page..
wouldn't it be possible that the user could determine the hard limit of the wallet?
 

moli

Grizzled Member
Aug 5, 2014
3,255
1,830
1,183
Before DS+ I was hoping Evan would create a similar wallet like the pre-DS+ wallets, which we would just check mark the Darksend box and send any amount of drk and let the network do the anonymizing. Now it doesn't work like that, and DS+ doesn't work with amounts larger than 5000. So does it mean users will need two wallets, one with DS+ and one with no DS+ to be able to do both?
 

flare

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
May 18, 2014
2,287
2,406
1,183
Germany
Hmm? I'm not sure where you got this from, but it's not the case at all. The 5000DRK limit is a hard limit for the entire wallet. Lets say a user has 100k DRK, the wallet would actually end up making a bunch of 500DRK inputs and 100DRK inputs. The only reason I added the hard limit was because there's no easy way to denominate a portion of the wallet without doing the rest.
I just interpreted the size calculation for the transaction - if i got it wrong: my bad :)
 

eduffield

Core Developer
Mar 9, 2014
1,084
5,319
183
Before DS+ I was hoping Evan would create a similar wallet like the pre-DS+ wallets, which we would just check mark the Darksend box and send any amount of drk and let the network do the anonymizing. Now it doesn't work like that, and DS+ doesn't work with amounts larger than 5000. So does it mean users will need two wallets, one with DS+ and one with no DS+ to be able to do both?
Well once all of the masternodes are running the new version and everyone is updated, I can release that after the fact and it will work without any change to the network.
 

moli

Grizzled Member
Aug 5, 2014
3,255
1,830
1,183
Well once all of the masternodes are running the new version and everyone is updated, I can release that after the fact and it will work without any change to the network.
Thanks, Evan. And so far the windows wallet v.17 seems to be doing well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: defunctec

yidakee

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 16, 2014
1,812
1,168
283
Yeah, they'd pay the old masternode network until they updated.
I'm not getting this Evan... So essentially there will be two MN active "forks" ? If mining pools do not get orphaned, what will their incentive to update! At best, they might even revert back to the 10% version. It was such a hard battle to get to 95% consensus, if we need to do another round without the "fear" of orphaned blocks... most will just go
"whhat? again? oh bugger off"

.
 

eduffield

Core Developer
Mar 9, 2014
1,084
5,319
183
I'm not getting this Evan... So essentially there will be two MN active "forks" ? If mining pools do not get orphaned, what will their incentive to update! At best, they might even revert back to the 10% version. It was such a hard battle to get to 95% consensus, if we need to do another round without the "fear" of orphaned blocks... most will just go
"whhat? again? oh bugger off"

.
They'll update or we'll kick them off the network.
 

Propulsion

The buck stops here.
Feb 26, 2014
1,008
467
183
Dash Address
XerHCGryyfZttUc6mnuRY3FNJzU1Jm9u5L
So it seems that the current testnet version v0.10.12.17-2-g695af70-beta is working swimmingly.

What now needs to be tested as far as bad actors, closing of wallets, shutting down MN's, etc..?

Also eduffield, did you ever receive the message of the person offering half a dozen ec2 instances to be used for testing purposes? The offer was from user stonehedge.
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
The offer still stands. I can offer clean installs but will hand credentials to trusted devs to configure however they can be useful.


EDIT: I will build them now whilst I have the time. Just in case they can be helpful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
6 EC2 instances built and ready to go. I'll keep them running for a month or two. First dev to message me gets them :D
 

thelonecrouton

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 15, 2014
1,135
813
283
Well I have no clue what the fargle I was doing wrong last night but tried again today and everything's smooth, fast, and frisky. I'd still like to see Total balance / anonymised / unconfirmed in the Send tab though. Please. :)
 

BelStar

Member
Apr 17, 2014
76
86
58
I have a wallet on Windows updated to the latest version (v0.10.12.17-gf266a9a-beta) for which a Darksend Denominate transaction has been stuck for more than 36 hours.



I can attach the wallet or send it to a dev if interested...
 

moli

Grizzled Member
Aug 5, 2014
3,255
1,830
1,183
I just sent a post and immediately deleted it when I saw the denominating resume on my wallet (after an hour). Also, just got the first collateral fee (Win wallet v.17).

upload_2014-8-8_14-24-57.png
 

Diirk

New Member
May 27, 2014
21
31
13
Imo its worth delaying RC4 release a few days to work solely on optimizing wallet UI and in-wallet messaging. Doing all this stuff optimally is critical to the success of rc4 release since its very important for users to know and understand what's going on and to have all the necessary things neatly presented.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.