Download 0.11.1.25
https://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 2992. (Read 9724017 times)
February 13, 2015, 03:18:47 PM
February 13, 2015, 03:17:47 PM
I updated to .25 and all my MN are showing this:
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
nooo .. dont use .25 !! only .24
Why? Its shown on http://darkcoin.io/
thats weird, thought Evan mentioned that .25 wasnt necessary anymore as he put enforcement on ?
February 13, 2015, 03:16:55 PM
I updated to .25 and half of my MN are showing this:
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
I've just done all of mine and set them to reindex as a precaution:
./darkcoind stop
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin-binaries/master/darkcoin-0.11.1.25-linux.tar.gz
tar zxvf darkcoin-0.11.1.25-linux.tar.gz
mv darkcoin-0.11.1.25-linux/bin/64/darkcoind .
chmod +x ./darkcoind
rm .darkcoin/peers.dat
./darkcoind -reindex
Job done!
February 13, 2015, 03:16:09 PM
I updated to .25 and all my MN are showing this:
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
nooo .. dont use .25 !! only .24
Why? Its shown on http://darkcoin.io/
February 13, 2015, 03:16:03 PM
219620 is the correct block currently... so no worries
February 13, 2015, 03:15:10 PM
I updated to .25 and all my MN are showing this:
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
nooo .. dont use .25 !! only .24
February 13, 2015, 03:14:29 PM
I updated to .25 and half of my MN are showing this:
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
Corrupted block database detected.
Do you want to rebuild the block database now?
February 13, 2015, 03:13:39 PM
if we upgraded to .24 could we still be seeing that error ''Warning : the network does not appear to fully agree etc''
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
run -reindex on the node with the error. fixes it right up.
doing that as i type this.. but weird thing is that i already did that and then i got that error.
delete peers.dat first... might just be talking to the same nodes that took you down the wrong fork.
did a delete of peers.dat and re-index and both my MN's show that message. Both are on block 219620
and both on .24
must be that safemode giving us that message
February 13, 2015, 03:00:12 PM
Does anyone know the details about the reconverge technology? My MNs and client nodes are all at a few different block heights. I would normally reindex to get on the right fork, but I'm taking this as an opportunity to test it. How long should I wait to see if my nodes and MNs reconverge? Is it a certain number or frequency of blocks that it checks? Will my MNs require a "masternode start" when they figure out the right fork? They currently show in the masternode list, but I imagine when they switch to the correct fork, that may no longer be the case.
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
Just --reindex, there are some issues with reconverge. We're going to test it more on testnet to figure out a better implementation of the tech.
February 13, 2015, 02:57:39 PM
Does anyone know the details about the reconverge technology? My MNs and client nodes are all at a few different block heights. I would normally reindex to get on the right fork, but I'm taking this as an opportunity to test it. How long should I wait to see if my nodes and MNs reconverge? Is it a certain number or frequency of blocks that it checks? Will my MNs require a "masternode start" when they figure out the right fork? They currently show in the masternode list, but I imagine when they switch to the correct fork, that may no longer be the case.
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
Just --reindex, there are some issues with reconverge. We're going to test it more on testnet to figure out a better implementation of the tech.
February 13, 2015, 02:57:35 PM
if we upgraded to .24 could we still be seeing that error ''Warning : the network does not appear to fully agree etc''
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
run -reindex on the node with the error. fixes it right up.
doing that as i type this.. but weird thing is that i already did that and then i got that error.
delete peers.dat first... might just be talking to the same nodes that took you down the wrong fork.
February 13, 2015, 02:56:13 PM
if we upgraded to .24 could we still be seeing that error ''Warning : the network does not appear to fully agree etc''
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
run -reindex on the node with the error. fixes it right up.
doing that as i type this.. but weird thing is that i already did that and then i got that error.
February 13, 2015, 02:51:20 PM
if we upgraded to .24 could we still be seeing that error ''Warning : the network does not appear to fully agree etc''
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
run -reindex on the node with the error. fixes it right up.
February 13, 2015, 02:51:01 PM
Does anyone know the details about the reconverge technology? My MNs and client nodes are all at a few different block heights. I would normally reindex to get on the right fork, but I'm taking this as an opportunity to test it. How long should I wait to see if my nodes and MNs reconverge? Is it a certain number or frequency of blocks that it checks? Will my MNs require a "masternode start" when they figure out the right fork? They currently show in the masternode list, but I imagine when they switch to the correct fork, that may no longer be the case.
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
I would love a good explanation of what to expect, or if anyone knows that they reconverged. Are there any messages in the log file that could confirm it is working?
Thanks all! Looking forward to testing this out!
February 13, 2015, 02:49:30 PM
The bad pools have caused enforcement not to work correctly, basically what's happening is they continued to mine the invalid chain with a lot of hashpower and ended up getting our clients into safemode, which automatically disables masternode payments. I'm writing a patch for 11.1.25 to fork and ban their clients. It will be available soon.
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
I've updated Suprnova to .24 and the message is gone ... looks ok here..
Great! What block height do you have?
You can always see the Block Height the pool is on here:
https://dark.suprnova.cc/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool
Oh brain freeze... thanks
February 13, 2015, 02:48:19 PM
if we upgraded to .24 could we still be seeing that error ''Warning : the network does not appear to fully agree etc''
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
because we are all thrown into safemode ? I have 1 MN showing that error and 1 not .. both MN's are on the same block
and with same version .24
February 13, 2015, 02:47:21 PM
The bad pools have caused enforcement not to work correctly, basically what's happening is they continued to mine the invalid chain with a lot of hashpower and ended up getting our clients into safemode, which automatically disables masternode payments. I'm writing a patch for 11.1.25 to fork and ban their clients. It will be available soon.
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
Write it so they are banned for at least a week... longer if possible. malicious little punks.
No way of really doing that as they would just generate a new primary mining address and be on their way.
ban the IP... a bit more of a hassle to change than the wallet address...
or if you want to be even more punitive in nature... ban that wallet address from sending any transactions to the network for a month or so... yeah they got the coin... but they can't do anything with it... probably not a good idea in the over all scheme of things PR wise but damn it would be nice to smash some fingers beyond them ever being able to use a keyboard again.
As frustrating as it is, manipulating the blockchain es no bueno. I'd love to see their pool fail though from miners leaving. They're a bunch of twats.
True statement... anybody have a street address for these boneheads? we can get it taken care of old school.
February 13, 2015, 02:45:25 PM
The bad pools have caused enforcement not to work correctly, basically what's happening is they continued to mine the invalid chain with a lot of hashpower and ended up getting our clients into safemode, which automatically disables masternode payments. I'm writing a patch for 11.1.25 to fork and ban their clients. It will be available soon.
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
I've updated Suprnova to .24 and the message is gone ... looks ok here..
Great! What block height do you have?
You can always see the Block Height the pool is on here:
https://dark.suprnova.cc/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool
February 13, 2015, 02:45:00 PM
The bad pools have caused enforcement not to work correctly, basically what's happening is they continued to mine the invalid chain with a lot of hashpower and ended up getting our clients into safemode, which automatically disables masternode payments. I'm writing a patch for 11.1.25 to fork and ban their clients. It will be available soon.
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
Write it so they are banned for at least a week... longer if possible. malicious little punks.
No way of really doing that as they would just generate a new primary mining address and be on their way.
ban the IP... a bit more of a hassle to change than the wallet address...
or if you want to be even more punitive in nature... ban that wallet address from sending any transactions to the network for a month or so... yeah they got the coin... but they can't do anything with it... probably not a good idea in the over all scheme of things PR wise but damn it would be nice to smash some fingers beyond them ever being able to use a keyboard again.
As frustrating as it is, manipulating the blockchain es no bueno. I'd love to see their pool fail though from miners leaving. They're a bunch of twats.
February 13, 2015, 02:41:30 PM
The bad pools have caused enforcement not to work correctly, basically what's happening is they continued to mine the invalid chain with a lot of hashpower and ended up getting our clients into safemode, which automatically disables masternode payments. I'm writing a patch for 11.1.25 to fork and ban their clients. It will be available soon.
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
If you're having any issues, just restart with --reindex
Write it so they are banned for at least a week... longer if possible. malicious little punks.
No way of really doing that as they would just generate a new primary mining address and be on their way.
ban the IP... a bit more of a hassle to change than the wallet address...
or if you want to be even more punitive in nature... ban that wallet address from sending any transactions to the network for a month or so... yeah they got the coin... but they can't do anything with it... probably not a good idea in the over all scheme of things PR wise but damn it would be nice to smash some fingers beyond them ever being able to use a keyboard again.
Jump to: