Author

Topic: [ANN] [XMG] MAGI | CPU mining | mPoW | mPoS | [MagiPay] - page 464. (Read 2375995 times)

sr. member
Activity: 490
Merit: 256
So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.
That Network Share number is just the percentage of peers using given wallet version, not relative hashing power. Ideally, it would be 100% using latest (v1.4.1 as of now).

Makes the sentence of xinwao any sense then?

If there is a too large hashing power, identy it, and seggregate it. To use a more than 50% hashing power is an attack for itself. (nobody is error free, do not make yourself a god)

Yes, it could be like you said.
But nobody is error free, do not make yourself a god. For sure people from m-core:1.3.1 are not on our new official chain.

God? I'm just explaining.

For sure people from m-core:1.3.1 are on several chains, like we were a few days ago.
full member
Activity: 171
Merit: 100
So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.
That Network Share number is just the percentage of peers using given wallet version, not relative hashing power. Ideally, it would be 100% using latest (v1.4.1 as of now).

Makes the sentence of xinwao any sense then?

If there is a too large hashing power, identy it, and seggregate it. To use a more than 50% hashing power is an attack for itself. (nobody is error free, do not make yourself a god)

Yes, it could be like you said.
But nobody is error free, do not make yourself a god. For sure people from m-core:1.3.1 are not on our new official chain.
sr. member
Activity: 876
Merit: 291
So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.
That Network Share number is just the percentage of peers using given wallet version, not relative hashing power. Ideally, it would be 100% using latest (v1.4.1 as of now).

Makes the sentence of xinwao any sense then?

If there is a too large hashing power, identy it, and seggregate it. To use a more than 50% hashing power is an attack for itself. (nobody is error free, do not make yourself a god)
sr. member
Activity: 490
Merit: 256
How did you chose which chain is valid/correct?
Shouldnt it be the one with largest mining power and largest amount of clients connected? Not the one we think should be selected but this which was (still is?) most strong and healthy?

Here https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg/#!network I see that we have:

Sub-version   Protocol   Count    Network Share
/m-core:1.3.1/   71051   98   61.6 %   
/m-core:1.4.0/   71051   49   30.8 %   
/m-core:1.4.0.1/   71061   8   5.0 %
/Magi:1.2.3.1/   71041   3   1.9 %
/Coin Magi:1.3.0/   71051   1   0.6 %

So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.

One mining instance shall NEVER have over 50% of hashing power, better much less!

This, if taking the largest instance as the main chain, you have to be ABSOLUTELY sure, this is not the agressor!

If you cannot be sure about this, take the second and third largest hashing instances for choosing the main chain, and monitor them.

That Network Share number is just the percentage of peers using given wallet version, not relative hashing power. Ideally, it would be 100% using latest (v1.4.1 as of now).
sr. member
Activity: 490
Merit: 256
How did you chose which chain is valid/correct?
Shouldnt it be the one with largest mining power and largest amount of clients connected? Not the one we think should be selected but this which was (still is?) most strong and healthy?

Here https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg/#!network I see that we have:

Sub-version   Protocol   Count    Network Share
/m-core:1.3.1/   71051   98   61.6 %   
/m-core:1.4.0/   71051   49   30.8 %   
/m-core:1.4.0.1/   71061   8   5.0 %
/Magi:1.2.3.1/   71041   3   1.9 %
/Coin Magi:1.3.0/   71051   1   0.6 %

So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.



Looking at the connection problems I'm still not sure if correct blockchain have been choosen.

A wallet version is not necessarily a chain. You may have wallets with the same version on different chains (wasn't it what happened in the first place?) and also different versions on same chain (also expected when everything is fine as long as protocols are compatible).
sr. member
Activity: 876
Merit: 291
How did you chose which chain is valid/correct?
Shouldnt it be the one with largest mining power and largest amount of clients connected? Not the one we think should be selected but this which was (still is?) most strong and healthy?

Here https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg/#!network I see that we have:

Sub-version   Protocol   Count    Network Share
/m-core:1.3.1/   71051   98   61.6 %   
/m-core:1.4.0/   71051   49   30.8 %   
/m-core:1.4.0.1/   71061   8   5.0 %
/Magi:1.2.3.1/   71041   3   1.9 %
/Coin Magi:1.3.0/   71051   1   0.6 %

So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.

One mining instance shall NEVER have over 50% of hashing power, better much less!

This, if taking the largest instance as the main chain, you have to be ABSOLUTELY sure, this is not the agressor!

If you cannot be sure about this, take the second and third largest hashing instances for choosing the main chain, and monitor them.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1005
lost all connections once wallet got to 1446771
Try restart the wallet.
Might be good if a pool could update the new wallet & start mining. Finding blocks might help keep the chain rolling again.
member
Activity: 114
Merit: 10
life is simple!
Updated the source:

https://github.com/magi-project/magi

Block data:

http://coinmagi.org/bin/block-chain/

Wallet downloads:

http://coinmagi.org/bin/m-wallet-1.4.1/

Changes:

* Update block version to 5 and reject any other versions

* Minimum coin age raise to 8 hours

* Coin maturity to be increased to 500 blocks

* Staking will be default to be disabled unless given "posii=1" in magi.conf

* Updated checkpoints



Just have to replace the m-wallet.exe in C:\Program Files\m-wallet?
an the magid.exe in C:\Program Files\m-wallet\daemon?

but there is two files in C:\Program Files\m-wallet\daemon (magid.exe and magid-x64.exe), i have a 64bits systems.
newbie
Activity: 41
Merit: 0
lost all connections once wallet got to 1446771
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
How did you chose which chain is valid/correct?
Shouldnt it be the one with largest mining power and largest amount of clients connected? Not the one we think should be selected but this which was (still is?) most strong and healthy?

Here https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg/#!network I see that we have:

Sub-version   Protocol   Count    Network Share
/m-core:1.3.1/   71051   98   61.6 %   
/m-core:1.4.0/   71051   49   30.8 %   
/m-core:1.4.0.1/   71061   8   5.0 %
/Magi:1.2.3.1/   71041   3   1.9 %
/Coin Magi:1.3.0/   71051   1   0.6 %

So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.



Looking at the connection problems I'm still not sure if correct blockchain have been choosen.

They are on the wrong chain.

Here's a list of connected versions and how many using that version (Got it from poolinfo)
Code:
Magi:1.2.1.1   : 1
Magi:1.2.3     : 1
Magi:1.2.3.1   : 1
m-core:1.3.1   : 46
m-core:1.4.0   : 18
m-core:1.4.0.1 : 7
m-core:1.4.1   : 21
full member
Activity: 171
Merit: 100
How did you chose which chain is valid/correct?
Shouldnt it be the one with largest mining power and largest amount of clients connected? Not the one we think should be selected but this which was (still is?) most strong and healthy?

Here https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg/#!network I see that we have:

Sub-version   Protocol   Count    Network Share
/m-core:1.3.1/   71051   98   61.6 %   
/m-core:1.4.0/   71051   49   30.8 %   
/m-core:1.4.0.1/   71061   8   5.0 %
/Magi:1.2.3.1/   71041   3   1.9 %
/Coin Magi:1.3.0/   71051   1   0.6 %

So the first chain (m-core 1.3.1, 98 clients, 61.6% network share) it the one.



Looking at the connection problems I'm still not sure if correct blockchain have been choosen.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1029
wallet always show  "out of sync",but already 1446791,why?
I'm also stuck at the same block - maybe there are only a couple of nodes past that point, hopefully the chain will start moving soon.

Is anybody on a moving chain?

Both poolinfo and my personal wallet is stuck @ 1446791


On the brightside, at least it seems that we are all on the same chain now =)

I'll leave my wallet running - hopefully the live nodes will propagate through soon
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
wallet always show  "out of sync",but already 1446791,why?
I'm also stuck at the same block - maybe there are only a couple of nodes past that point, hopefully the chain will start moving soon.

Is anybody on a moving chain?

Both poolinfo and my personal wallet is stuck @ 1446791

full member
Activity: 171
Merit: 100
New blockchain/client is stuck. Please add some working nodes. Thx.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1005
All give the chain some time to become more stable.
If you like to mine don't use big hashrate.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1029
Really hoping the issues can be fix soon and have everything back to normal. It's my favorite coin to CPU mine.
I can see Joe is working hard for a fix and I thank him for his time.
Love this coin but I just want it back to running smoothly again Cry

Likewise  Undecided

Great post - Magi is awesome =) Thanks for all your hard work Joe
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1029
wallet always show  "out of sync",but already 1446791,why?
I'm also stuck at the same block - maybe there are only a couple of nodes past that point, hopefully the chain will start moving soon.

Is anybody on a moving chain?
full member
Activity: 151
Merit: 100
Moar mining!!! .. oh wait, that's too much
Really hoping the issues can be fix soon and have everything back to normal. It's my favorite coin to CPU mine.
I can see Joe is working hard for a fix and I thank him for his time.
Love this coin but I just want it back to running smoothly again Cry

Likewise  Undecided
full member
Activity: 343
Merit: 102
guys wait for more instructions the new wallet still does not sync properly. hopefully will be done soon.
newbie
Activity: 6
Merit: 0
wallet always show  "out of sync",but already 1446791,why?

I have the same after new update

https://ibb.co/enGgEv
Jump to: