Topic: [ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN - page 340. (Read 782479 times)

To try this out, I've deployed 1 Vultr Ubuntu 16.04 server with IPv6 and logged in as root.
Then I downloaded your 0.2 script but not sure how to run it.... Is this correct?

1. Download the script.
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/marsmensch/masternode-vps-setup/master/dnet_vps.sh

2. Before running it, edit the script and change the setup nodes count. (e.g. from 3 to 5)
nano ./dnet_vps.sh

3. Run the script
sh ./dnet_vps.sh

When I do above, I get the following syntax error. Did I miss something?
./dnet_vps.sh: 59: ./dnet_vps.sh: Syntax error: "(" unexpected

Thats the price everybody can get now with some work on a small vultr instance and my setup script:

Sneak preview:

$1 a month for a vps..... that's ridiculously competitive.

I pay from $2.20 - $3.50

For 1$/month per masternode, running a masternode is profitable for ages. Upgrade to my auto masternode setup script implementation for this and more upcoming ;-)

I was away for the weekend with no internet access.  I got loads of payouts when I opened my wallet but nodes needed reactivating.  I was just wondering what might have caused them to stop?

I am also testing the obfuscation feature which seems to be stuck on 25% and either says obfuscation is idle, waiting in a queue or no compatable masternode is found.

Is there something in need to do or change?

Hello,

Thank you very much for your splendid explanation. I fully understand now the inner working of it. I am sorry if I was a little slow in understanding the optimization of staking. However it was important to me. Thanks again.

What I have observed is that my stacking address got splitted in many inputs of around 2500 +/-. Will see how it evolves. But right now they have a tendency to go 2500+ as they don't split anymore.

Thanks for info.


BTW, please fix this in OP. 30 days =/= forever

Here's the dev's explanation of the seesaw reward mechanism that is used to determine the split between the masternode and the staker of the block:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15952720

Also, you can see the current Stake vs Masternode block reward breakdown (near-real time) here:
http://178.254.23.111/~pub/DN/DN_masternode_payments_stats.html

FYI - Estimated Payment per Masternode is currently incorrect as it takes into account the DNET count of the stake reward as well.
So you need to multiply the estimated payment by 31/45 to get the correct daily DNET payment & profitability of each masternode.

Thanks for sharing this! I am only staking at the moment as I thought staking / masternoding will be balanced and equally profitable. I think you're getting more coins to your masternodes because more people staking than running masternodes so the system gives more coins to masternodes to balance it.

Its a POS project launched for shopping centers etc..
It includes many good features but it needs a lot of features to be added..
Hope to see it developed soon..

I have almost equal amount of DNET locked in masternodes and staking. Yesterday my masternodes earned 2.7x more DNET than staking wallet. Even minus VPS cost masternodes now more profitable.

As far as the staking is concerned there is no difference between a wallet that has 10 addresses, each with 2k DNET, and one address that you sent 2k DNET to 10 times. If you are experimenting with different input sizes trying to find the the most profitable way to set your wallet up for staking it may be convenient to use several addresses to better track things.

There is a fine line between having inputs that are large enough to stake in a reasonable time frame and enough inputs to have good odds of being the next person to stake.

I have experimented with different size inputs, and found that I get more stakes per day by letting them split down to the threshold where they stop splitting. I am not sure if you are aware, but whenever an input of yours stakes it splits into 2 inputs until splitting would drop the size of the inputs to less than nStakeSplitThreshold, which for DNET is 2000. This means that if left alone all of the inputs in your wallet will end up being between 2k and 4k.

I have even gone ahead and compiled a wallet with a different nStakeSplitThreshold, trying many sizes up to and including 50k. That leads me to believe that the threshold we have chosen is close to ideal. In a future wallet we will be bringing the ability to adjust the threshold out to the end user, either via a command line option or an RPC command.

Hello, It's not clear to me what you mean by having many smaller inputs. Is it to have a wallet.dat with different addresses with each one 2k-5k? Or one single address with everything on it? I think it's the first one. However I don't understand the logic behind it. Could you please explain a little bit more on that?

One wallet, many smaller inputs. 2k-5k are good input sizes

Is it better to have one big wallet or many smaller wallets for staking?

Only 2 of all my MNs are missing after weekend and it is server-side issue. Looks good.

To add to the response you got, also see if you can find your txid in the "masternode list" output.

If you can see it in there along with your status looking good both from the masternode (masternode status) and from controller (masternode list-conf), then it's all good.

Right now, it's about 36 to 48 hours for first payment. After that, you'll get a payment roughly every 12 hours or so currently.

The MN payment info page is actually made by the DASH dev for DNET.
http://178.254.23.111/~pub/DN/DN_masternode_payments_stats.html

A little report: I have a masternode and staking address on the same wallet. Both work perfectly since a few days. I average 3 staking payments for 1 masternode. It's great!

Probably running "darknet-cli masternode status" on the masternode is best.
Should show   "status" : "Masternode successfully started"

And seeing that the masternode is up to the latest block and has peer connections:
run "darknet-cli getinfo" and check blocks and connections.

I have noticed that my peers are often a bit ahead of the monitor here:
http://178.254.23.111/~pub/DN/DN_masternode_payments_stats.html

I've also  noticed, sometimes a masternode gets a bit behind for a few minutes, but usually it resolves
itself. Checking the peers and adding a couple more can help.

Hello,

Welcome to DNET! Thank you for your answer. You raise very good points. However to clarify my point the goal wasn't to make a big hype like your wrote but simply give useful information about this great project early to permit an advantageous trade.

Be both .