Topic: Alert: chain fork caused by pre-0.8 clients dealing badly with large blocks - page 15. (Read 155565 times)
March 12, 2013, 01:08:27 AM
1 more block, go,go,go!
March 12, 2013, 01:07:16 AM
Please explain how the timestamp of block 225449(2013-03-12 05:30:02) is before block 225448(2013-03-12 05:33:45)?
There's no sane way to enforce timestamps. Say someone mines a block that you think has a time three minutes in the future, what do you do? Do you ignore it? Do you deliberately set your time even further in the future and try to mine a block with a time you believe is wrong?
March 12, 2013, 01:06:51 AM
Just another reorg. NBD
March 12, 2013, 01:06:00 AM
Damn, Bitcoin is so kickass resilient. I want to see how Mastercard, Visa or Amex would manage to fork a network problem into another dimension and continue processing transactions as if nothing happened while the network self organizes to route around the issue. That accident could seem like negative PR for Bitcoin, but by the time the dust settles, bystanders can only be impressed by the insolent lack of consequences of this global network outage.
March 12, 2013, 01:04:45 AM
Please explain how the timestamp of block 225449(2013-03-12 05:30:02) is before block 225448(2013-03-12 05:33:45)?
It is permitted within the spec that one block may set its 'nTime' field before a previous block... but always within a certain range of time.
March 12, 2013, 01:04:20 AM
3 more...come on!
March 12, 2013, 01:02:27 AM
ok, every software has its bugs. Anyway, the soonest you discover and correct the bug, the better 
In this case, it was a matter of minutes ! Gratz to the Devs !!!
I am not sure how well the things will work out after this network becomes much larger then the small community we are having now.
March 12, 2013, 12:57:00 AM
ok, every software has its bugs. Anyway, the soonest you discover and correct the bug, the better
In this case, it was a matter of minutes ! Gratz to the Devs !!!
March 12, 2013, 12:53:36 AM
I personally am surprised and delighted that we move in this direction (back to the universal fork as trunk) rather than force an upgrade.
So am I.
I thought only once banks or governments start cracking down on Bitcoin we will appreciate Bitcoins's capability of graceful degration [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fault-tolerant_system] but it only took a flaw to proove that it has that capability.
My deep respect for the devs who took this issue on and solved it. You guys made Bitcoin and my believe in it even stronger.
To blockchain eternity!
Joe
I think I kinda understand why this is a good thing, but can you explain like I'm five? Basically, why would it have been bad to let the 0.8 chain continue?
Is the reason that it'd "force" older users to upgrade and that's a mean thing to do?
If we stayed on 0.8 it would take a LONG time for all services to get up to snuff. By going back to 0.7 everyone will be aligned within a few hours.
March 12, 2013, 12:51:56 AM
What if the .7 chain never catches the .8 chain?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
it has grown by 1 in the last 2 hrs, some btcguild block
difficulty adjusts don't happen that frequently
ed: nm. looks like that btcguild was on the other side. yeah, just 1
How often does difficulty get adjusted if the hashing power is greatly reduced?
Looking at this http://blockchain.info/pools BTCguild has a large 22% of total network hashrate, should we be worried that they are still working on the 0.8 chain?
Difficulty is adjusted every ~2000 (ed2: 2016... I think. hah) blocks. I suppose some people could keep going on the orphaned side, but it won't matter anymore (after this pre 0.8 side catches up)....
Uh, I forgot what that other orphaned chain was, but it depended on people upgrading their clients, not downgrading... orphaned blocks on that one continued to grow for months... I doubt it'd be the same for a downgrade
March 12, 2013, 12:49:27 AM
What if the .7 chain never catches the .8 chain?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
it has grown by 1 in the last 2 hrs, some btcguild block
difficulty adjusts don't happen that frequently
ed: nm. looks like that btcguild was on the other side. yeah, just 1
How often does difficulty get adjusted if the hashing power is greatly reduced?
Looking at this http://blockchain.info/pools BTCguild has a large 22% of total network hashrate, should we be worried that they are still working on the 0.8 chain?
Id switch pools
March 12, 2013, 12:48:58 AM
Yes, you can see it catching up here too now: http://blockchain.info
This is insane, I have learned more today about Bitcoin than in the last 6 months.
March 12, 2013, 12:48:08 AM
What if the .7 chain never catches the .8 chain?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
it has grown by 1 in the last 2 hrs, some btcguild block
difficulty adjusts don't happen that frequently
ed: nm. looks like that btcguild was on the other side. yeah, just 1
How often does difficulty get adjusted if the hashing power is greatly reduced?
Looking at this http://blockchain.info/pools BTCguild has a large 22% of total network hashrate, should we be worried that they are still working on the 0.8 chain?
March 12, 2013, 12:46:59 AM
March 12, 2013, 12:46:05 AM
Before I knew this was going on, I sent 2btc to my Mtgox account. After I found out, I downgraded to 7.2 and synched up. Now the transaction still shows but 0 confirmations. I wonder how long it's going to take to confirm, or get cancelled or whatever. I just hope my BTC don't disappear into limbo.
Have a transaction from 8 blocks ago showing as confirmed but has not shown on the other end. On 0.8.
March 12, 2013, 12:44:53 AM
Please explain how the timestamp of block 225449(2013-03-12 05:30:02) is before block 225448(2013-03-12 05:33:45)?
Timestamps can be moved forward or backward (X-Roll-Ntime IIRC) to generate new nonce.
March 12, 2013, 12:43:37 AM
God, phone monitor failed again, waked up too late...
March 12, 2013, 12:42:20 AM
What if the .7 chain never catches the .8 chain?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but if many miners abandon the .8 chain won't the difficulty adjust down, so that even though there are much few miners on the .8 chain they will still be able to stay ahead of the .7 chain due to the decreased difficulty?
If this were to happen would the .7 miners have to concede defeat to the .8 chain and switch or would they continue on and at that point we'd have 2 versions of bitcoin?
The .8 chain still seem to be growing and still has pools mining it?
it has grown by 1 in the last 2 hrs, some btcguild block
difficulty adjusts don't happen that frequently
ed: nm. looks like that btcguild was on the other side. yeah, just 1
March 12, 2013, 12:41:37 AM
We are soon going to witness the largest re-org in my time in bitcoin land. We will have thousands of computers worldwide doing a 24+ block reorg around the same time. Now I am looking for headlines saying "Mysterious power consumption spike worldwide, aliens or terrorists?"
Jump to: