A coin this good is not going anywhere.
I can agree with this
Topic: [ANN][GRA] Graincoin - New PoW/PoS coin | Fast, secure | Version 1.5 Released! - page 31. (Read 177059 times)
January 31, 2014, 10:59:07 AM
A coin this good is not going anywhere.
I can agree with this
January 31, 2014, 10:38:18 AM
thats the good fact of course, ill buy more too when its that cheap.
i first bought at 15, but there is no need to drop that far ....
i first bought at 15, but there is no need to drop that far ....
January 31, 2014, 10:33:52 AM
i think we need a little more PR to stop the constant downfall 
Lot of new coins out getting a lot of buzz.
Just means I'll end up investing in more grain. A coin this good is not going anywhere.
January 31, 2014, 10:31:03 AM
i think we need a little more PR to stop the constant downfall
January 31, 2014, 05:13:31 AM
January 30, 2014, 06:56:24 PM
What you described is perfect normal in all the coins. The time it takes for the network to negotiate depends on your network status and others network status. There is a predefined algorithm to determine which is the winner blocks/chains, and it is perfect fine and justified for everyone, as the same algorithm is applied in all case.
Just to give you an historical example: WorldCoin, one of the top alt coins, had one incident a few months ago: one of the major mining pools in EU, because of the network connectivity issues related to some network, mined for 5 hours, and created a 462 block chain fork, this chain, became orphans after 5 hours of some blocked mined and confirmed 500+ times. This happens, and it happens in all coins. I don't see for GRA it is any different, from the data you posted.
@Bosian
Thank you,
Actually, I have mined NEC/CIN//LK7/PHS and others to compare the issues,
and, I didn't find similar issues (maybe they have much higher Diff ?),
anyway, If you say it is normal, and it is normal, like as a person, every coins has their own personality(?),
Maybe I expected too much(too perfect) ?
^^
January 30, 2014, 05:47:13 PM
Q1: Because when the block is found the node informs its peers that it found a new block, but not telling the block to the peers. Then it is peers responsibility to pull the block itself from that node. This has certain latency that depends on two factors - the network latency and the participating nodes performance and current load.
Q2: because the target time is 30 seconds while the delays in propagation are quite big, so the probability of two blocks found in the same time period required to propagate the block over the network is higher than the same probability for litecoin, for example. I can't recall if it was proposed in regard to the Grain or some other coin, but the idea was to double the target time instead of forthcoming reward halving. This proposed solution should lower the orphan ratio.
about Q2,
I have tracked my debug.log file, from xx:50:00
at xx:50:23 Received block 0000000f275e14b8fdb
xx:50:24 Received block 00000009f2f6774c316
xx:50:25 Recieved block 3b4a224dc17a785d8fbe <- PoW
xx:50:25 Reorganized
new best is the matched with the previous block of #159016
xx:50:43 I have found a block
xx:51:21 orphans
My computer report, I found a block #159016 at xx:50:43(and got feedback on xx:50:49), it is declare the block is orphans on xx:51:25
the block has been connected at xx:50:19, and other block is connected on xx:51:21
: The block has been found on xx:50:19
: QT just reorganize the block on xx:50:21, and there is no noticed, it indicate the old chain yet
: my computer waste time till xx:50:43, and found the next block
: got feedback from some body on xx:50:49
: on xx:51:21, it has notified about #159016 has found already,
: on xx:51:22, reorgainze the block chain, and my founds are become orphans,
(1) I just lost 30 seconds (xx:50:19 ~ xx:50:49), till I found a new block,
(2) It has been fixed on xx:51:21,
Maybe, it will takes a time to decide as an orphan block, it can takes a time sometime (xx:50:49~xx:41:21, 33 seconds)
I am not sure,
Is it the normal situation ?
I have to lost 61 seconds till I got the notification about #159016 which has found 62 seconds ago ?
The height of block racing can be happen with extremely low diff and large hashes,
becuase of there is no time gap to share the information between QTs
Is it possible on this coin now ?
and, such a frequently ?
To process a block how long latency will be needed ?
I can agree about explaination, because of your explaination is absolutely right,
but, my question is it is not fit on the current situation,
if there are couple of seconds of time-gap, maybe yes,
but, there are 20-30 seconds of time-gap, and didn't aware somebody found a new block ?
and, fixed after next block ?
I can not agree it is normal,
If just happen once, maybe I can say, even difficult but can happen,
but, it is happen 2-3 times every hours ?
AGAIN, I do not talk about Techincally Possible or Not,
Becasue of technically possible,
But, I am asking Why too frequently ?
Anyway, the dev think it is normal for this coin, and it is normal.
and, I remebered the dev say this is normal. so, at least, it is normal for this coin,
so, I do not want to mention about it again,
What you described is perfect normal in all the coins. The time it takes for the network to negotiate depends on your network status and others network status. There is a predefined algorithm to determine which is the winner blocks/chains, and it is perfect fine and justified for everyone, as the same algorithm is applied in all case.
Just to give you an historical example: WorldCoin, one of the top alt coins, had one incident a few months ago: one of the major mining pools in EU, because of the network connectivity issues related to some network, mined for 5 hours, and created a 462 block chain fork, this chain, became orphans after 5 hours of some blocked mined and confirmed 500+ times. This happens, and it happens in all coins. I don't see for GRA it is any different, from the data you posted.
January 30, 2014, 05:34:13 PM
Q1: Because when the block is found the node informs its peers that it found a new block, but not telling the block to the peers. Then it is peers responsibility to pull the block itself from that node. This has certain latency that depends on two factors - the network latency and the participating nodes performance and current load.
Q2: because the target time is 30 seconds while the delays in propagation are quite big, so the probability of two blocks found in the same time period required to propagate the block over the network is higher than the same probability for litecoin, for example. I can't recall if it was proposed in regard to the Grain or some other coin, but the idea was to double the target time instead of forthcoming reward halving. This proposed solution should lower the orphan ratio.
about Q2,
I have tracked my debug.log file, from xx:50:00
at xx:50:23 Received block 0000000f275e14b8fdb
xx:50:24 Received block 00000009f2f6774c316
xx:50:25 Recieved block 3b4a224dc17a785d8fbe <- PoW
xx:50:25 Reorganized
new best is the matched with the previous block of #159016
xx:50:43 I have found a block
xx:51:21 orphans
My computer report, I found a block #159016 at xx:50:43(and got feedback on xx:50:49), it is declare the block is orphans on xx:51:25
the block has been connected at xx:50:19, and other block is connected on xx:51:21
: The block has been found on xx:50:19
: QT just reorganize the block on xx:50:21, and there is no noticed, it indicate the old chain yet
: my computer waste time till xx:50:43, and found the next block
: got feedback from some body on xx:50:49
: on xx:51:21, it has notified about #159016 has found already,
: on xx:51:22, reorgainze the block chain, and my founds are become orphans,
(1) I just lost 30 seconds (xx:50:19 ~ xx:50:49), till I found a new block,
(2) It has been fixed on xx:51:21,
Maybe, it will takes a time to decide as an orphan block, it can takes a time sometime (xx:50:49~xx:41:21, 33 seconds)
I am not sure,
Is it the normal situation ?
I have to lost 61 seconds till I got the notification about #159016 which has found 62 seconds ago ?
The height of block racing can be happen with extremely low diff and large hashes,
becuase of there is no time gap to share the information between QTs
Is it possible on this coin now ?
and, such a frequently ?
To process a block how long latency will be needed ?
I can agree about explaination, because of your explaination is absolutely right,
but, my question is it is not fit on the current situation,
if there are couple of seconds of time-gap, maybe yes,
but, there are 20-30 seconds of time-gap, and didn't aware somebody found a new block ?
and, fixed after next block ?
I can not agree it is normal,
If just happen once, maybe I can say, even difficult but can happen,
but, it is happen 2-3 times every hours ?
AGAIN, I do not talk about Techincally Possible or Not,
Becasue of technically possible,
But, I am asking Why too frequently ?
Anyway, the dev think it is normal for this coin, and it is normal.
and, I remebered the dev say this is normal. so, at least, it is normal for this coin,
so, I do not want to mention about it again,
January 30, 2014, 04:56:47 PM
I recommend http://pages.github.com/ for hosting an FAQ.
It's free, and allows multiple people to submit questions/answers through pull requests.
It's free, and allows multiple people to submit questions/answers through pull requests.
January 30, 2014, 04:40:48 PM
Whenever I start the wallet it freezes and I get not responding. I've restarted and re installed. Same problem. Was working fine yesterday.
I've noted since a few days ago that my wallet freezes constantly and uses more cpu than before...
Unfortunately I can't even test the issue as I have no Windows. However, Bosian said that he did not note anything similar. Also, there is a post regarding freezes:
I am having a lot of trouble running the 1.4 wallet with minting. I am running windows 7 and if I unlock it for minting it goes to non responsive.... Any ideas?
having same trouble, mostly when another running wallet grabs the focus. try: task manager>processes tab>sort by name, right click [grain]>set priority>DO NOT USE REALTIME
usually works for me, the realtime setting freezez my comp.
Changing priority does nothing.
It's really strange because before the cpu load was high only when started and then was minimal while stayed open. Now it's constantly high and "not responding" most of the time...
I think I will try to make a FAQ that could be added to OP as the same problems keep popping up on every 2nd page.
Yes FAQ will be a good idea. As many questions are asked by different people and answered many times in the thread.
January 30, 2014, 04:31:55 PM
I do not think so,
because of COINWARZ can not calculate the actual earning rate for PoW/PoS coins,
and it makes the miner mis-understand about their mining result
Also Coinwarz has a big delay in its reporting - most of the time it shows the diff that is already gone.
January 30, 2014, 04:28:46 PM
@mkimid
OK. You found a block. It got to the node that runs block explorer so you see the same picture there. At the same time (a few seconds or milliseconds later) block explorer receives a notification that some third node, to which you have no direct connection, found a block with the same height. The explorer's wallet retrieve that block but nothing changes as both blocks are of the same height. The explorer's wallet informs in turn that third node that it has alternate block. While all these things happened that third node found a new block based on it's previous block as it is continuously mining like you. It also send a notification to the block explorer's wallet. Then the longest chain wins. Explorer's wallet switches to it and informs you about the changes. Your wallet has nothing else than to drop it's own chain.
OK. You found a block. It got to the node that runs block explorer so you see the same picture there. At the same time (a few seconds or milliseconds later) block explorer receives a notification that some third node, to which you have no direct connection, found a block with the same height. The explorer's wallet retrieve that block but nothing changes as both blocks are of the same height. The explorer's wallet informs in turn that third node that it has alternate block. While all these things happened that third node found a new block based on it's previous block as it is continuously mining like you. It also send a notification to the block explorer's wallet. Then the longest chain wins. Explorer's wallet switches to it and informs you about the changes. Your wallet has nothing else than to drop it's own chain.
@bee7
thank you for your explain,
I understand, and, that is normal, you know, I know, and the others are know,
the single orphans, how frequently can be happen ?
the double or triple liked orphasn how frequently can be happen ?
Actually, Orphans itself not an issue, and not an problem,
ALL coins are having similar problem becasue of it is the P2P coin,
but, How frequently ? it is the question for this coin.
and, Why sometime it takes very long time ? it is the second question.
and, Why mostly take over by PoS ? [maybe PoS Diff is very low, so, more chance to take over]
such as
[latest] PoW-PoW-PoW-pos-pos-pos.... [oldest]
----> take over
[latest] PoS-PoS-PoS-pos-pos-pos... [oldest]
(1) the 3rd PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:30
(2) the 2nd PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:35
(3) the 1st PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:40 [ at least 10 seconds from 3rd to 1st ]
(4) the replaced PoS : timestamp : 00:00:25
replaced PoS is 5 seconds eailer than PoW, so, it is makesense,
Q1 : why it took 5 ~ 15 (5+10) seconds are took to fix this orphans ? My question, it takes too long time.
Q2 : why happen too frequently ? [maybe, just my feeling]
Q1: Because when the block is found the node informs its peers that it found a new block, but not telling the block to the peers. Then it is peers responsibility to pull the block itself from that node. This has certain latency that depends on two factors - the network latency and the participating nodes performance and current load.
Q2: because the target time is 30 seconds while the delays in propagation are quite big, so the probability of two blocks found in the same time period required to propagate the block over the network is higher than the same probability for litecoin, for example. I can't recall if it was proposed in regard to the Grain or some other coin, but the idea was to double the target time instead of forthcoming reward halving. This proposed solution should lower the orphan ratio.
January 30, 2014, 04:22:17 PM
I do not think so,
because of COINWARZ can not calculate the actual earning rate for PoW/PoS coins,
and it makes the miner mis-understand about their mining result
January 30, 2014, 04:01:11 PM
@mkimid
OK. You found a block. It got to the node that runs block explorer so you see the same picture there. At the same time (a few seconds or milliseconds later) block explorer receives a notification that some third node, to which you have no direct connection, found a block with the same height. The explorer's wallet retrieve that block but nothing changes as both blocks are of the same height. The explorer's wallet informs in turn that third node that it has alternate block. While all these things happened that third node found a new block based on it's previous block as it is continuously mining like you. It also send a notification to the block explorer's wallet. Then the longest chain wins. Explorer's wallet switches to it and informs you about the changes. Your wallet has nothing else than to drop it's own chain.
OK. You found a block. It got to the node that runs block explorer so you see the same picture there. At the same time (a few seconds or milliseconds later) block explorer receives a notification that some third node, to which you have no direct connection, found a block with the same height. The explorer's wallet retrieve that block but nothing changes as both blocks are of the same height. The explorer's wallet informs in turn that third node that it has alternate block. While all these things happened that third node found a new block based on it's previous block as it is continuously mining like you. It also send a notification to the block explorer's wallet. Then the longest chain wins. Explorer's wallet switches to it and informs you about the changes. Your wallet has nothing else than to drop it's own chain.
@bee7
thank you for your explain,
I understand, and, that is normal, you know, I know, and the others are know,
the single orphans, how frequently can be happen ?
the double or triple liked orphasn how frequently can be happen ?
Actually, Orphans itself not an issue, and not an problem,
ALL coins are having similar problem becasue of it is the P2P coin,
but, How frequently ? it is the question for this coin.
and, Why sometime it takes very long time ? it is the second question.
and, Why mostly take over by PoS ? [maybe PoS Diff is very low, so, more chance to take over]
such as
[latest] PoW-PoW-PoW-pos-pos-pos.... [oldest]
----> take over
[latest] PoS-PoS-PoS-pos-pos-pos... [oldest]
(1) the 3rd PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:30
(2) the 2nd PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:35
(3) the 1st PoW in block explorer : timestamp : 00:00:40 [ at least 10 seconds from 3rd to 1st ]
(4) the replaced PoS : timestamp : 00:00:25
replaced PoS is 5 seconds eailer than PoW, so, it is makesense,
Q1 : why it took 5 ~ 15 (5+10) seconds are took to fix this orphans ? My question, it takes too long time.
Q2 : why happen too frequently ? [maybe, just my feeling]
January 30, 2014, 01:47:39 PM
How does Grain's code look when you compare it to LKY, BUK, STR, MEM, COL, MPL ect ... ??
Orphans.. glitchy PoS/PoW .. .how many other similarities will be found ?
Orphans.. glitchy PoS/PoW .. .how many other similarities will be found ?
UPDATE:
Looks like this coin has also fallen victim to the negative target spacing problem that has plagued many other coins recently; however, this one seems to have failed much earlier. Last proof-of-work block was accepted around 8th October 2013. scrypt/proof-of-work mining would have stopped working at this time.
...
Looks like this coin has also fallen victim to the negative target spacing problem that has plagued many other coins recently; however, this one seems to have failed much earlier. Last proof-of-work block was accepted around 8th October 2013. scrypt/proof-of-work mining would have stopped working at this time.
...
When I first found this problem (as I were not able to PoW mine the coin I liked) I looked through several coins and found 5 or 6 more (my list was not exhaustive, I just confirmed to myself that the problem is common). I did inform the developers of these coins. One of the coins was Grain. I must tell that Bosian was already working on fix at that time. The only coin that has this problem 'officially' solved ATM is Grain.
As for the rest of the code base - yes, all coins have the roots in bitcoin's/ppcoin's original code. Many problems, that were introduced at the early cloning or later during sub-cloning, are traveling from coin to coin, that's true. I also have a lot of orphans with Grain, but this does not make me worrying. The orphans is a part of the protocol. You can't eliminate them completely. Even bitcoin's network with its 10 minutes target has orphans.
I just count how many my blocks eventually survived in a day (actually how much reward in BTC equivalent I get) and compare it to the estimate of how much other coins I can mine with my two rigs (including Litecoin). Most of the time the Grain wins even at its current rate.
January 30, 2014, 01:30:02 PM
First issue of "Crypto Monthly", a new free & digital crypto magazine, can be downloaded at https://db.tt/LnHTVldQ (created by me & Sergios)
We have a Grain article in there for you guys!
Feedback is always welcome, we are aware this is far from perfect, but it's a learning process
We have a Grain article in there for you guys!
Feedback is always welcome, we are aware this is far from perfect, but it's a learning process
January 30, 2014, 01:29:38 PM
Found 7 Blocks in the last 24 hours... all valid... seems like i´m lucky today...
Congrats.
January 30, 2014, 01:24:30 PM
Found 7 Blocks in the last 24 hours... all valid... seems like i´m lucky today...
January 30, 2014, 01:01:14 PM
Many clients have been known to hog the cpu while starting up.
Use taskmanager to set the affinity on Graincoin-qt.exe, so it uses only one cpu core.
Use taskmanager to set the affinity on Graincoin-qt.exe, so it uses only one cpu core.
The problem is not on startup, as the cpu load is high at that point.
The problem is after we enable minting by unlocking the wallet... It used to work ok but started to freeze a few days ago. Seems ok now.
January 30, 2014, 12:49:41 PM
Many clients have been known to hog the cpu while starting up.
Use taskmanager to set the affinity on Graincoin-qt.exe, so it uses only one cpu core.
Use taskmanager to set the affinity on Graincoin-qt.exe, so it uses only one cpu core.
Jump to: