Topic: ◈◈Bitcredit ◈◈ Migrating to UniQredit◈◈ - page 178. (Read 284527 times)

look at the pool, no crash 
New work for worker! Difficulty: 0.000001 Share difficulty: 0.000022 Total block value: 50.020000 BCR including 2 transactions

Also i don't get your argument against cutting out old clients. what relevance do they have to p2pool?

Then, explain me why p2pool did crash with only 2 transactions? THIS has NOTHING to do with the block size.
EDIT: I've included a screenshot in my original post and the getblocktemplate output of the block with the transactions.

did you look at the changes in the above commit? it is about block size, this is determined by the number of transactions. a transaction's size is dependent on the number of inputs in the tx. if you are sending a tx with lots of inputs, it's size is exponentially larger than that of a single input.

this is not a hard fork, it is simply an update to encourage users to use the correct version of the wallet. 0.30.16.4 and the update 0.30.16.5 are compatible, all other previous wallets are obsolete.

The issue has nothing to do with the maximum blocksize. p2pool crashed with only 2 transactions in the past. It has nothing to do with the wallet, either. Look at the current hashrate of p2pool. It goes down with only two transactions. If you want to update the wallet (with a hardfork), you have to contact the exchanges, too.
EDIT: https://www.dropbox.com/s/qa92qcgjgf9tl1b/hashrate.png?dl=0
{
    "capabilities" : [
        "proposal"
    ],
    "version" : 2,
    "previousblockhash" : "000001253da70c5bbba1fe69e3843f0fa74a01cfca8a8e463bc21afeba685ccf",
    "transactions" : [
        {
            "data" : "010000000106c7c792d48818ca40b53ff6da5cbeff413f5b9ad243b156ed5f09b3761cdbd000000 0006b483045022100a59a119da18ff0b8fd4452e0c1d2584f993465c8a05431af6f529c83fa11a2 3b02205b6cceee6d9a40be6076e8c64755de9da5655950ddb1ff70e7eac80167ba2b6e0121034fd 0c17fd527cb682227d2442001d86aa94476b66f5e7e380350ea4aefdc3b72feffffff0240420f00 000000001976a9148c601112cd36e77a57bb7d65d9339f3030030b2088ac80457c3b00000000197 6a9140f48e4a041b9eb2d3fa272f147f32a37c3a73f9e88ac28470100",
            "hash" : "8d9769138c54522dfc2c203f3135036cf1b1cb15c1997eff0790cd53c818fad2",
            "depends" : [
            ],
            "fee" : 1000000,
            "sigops" : 2
        },
        {
            "data" : "01000000017899d762e81e14edf9b320beacdf39433ee704b0e3990dd66d0c3521d0b8d47501000 0006a4730440220194cfb1597ff6d162bf6a08103539eb6b9d87997fb77835a55280ad4b9f1d93b 0220500233f8cee6588f2578f5ff289a4654a7bbbf14a6985344945a9b18814cec5c0121029f95c ba2829852291bcc3c6ad7a4230c27f8cb8911c685199c08309150ad955cfeffffff0280457c3b00 0000001976a914ce5d5d9cd6170d011422a5365a620be0bc8faf6d88ac40420f00000000001976a 9148c601112cd36e77a57bb7d65d9339f3030030b2088ac28470100",
            "hash" : "7ac8b5ba54cab0fed2dc139eac7609161a5e4c377e5f961c7e8815e756217dc0",
            "depends" : [
            ],
            "fee" : 1000000,
            "sigops" : 2
        }
    ],
    "coinbaseaux" : {
        "flags" : "062f503253482f"
    },
    "coinbasevalue" : 5002000000,
    "longpollid" : "000001253da70c5bbba1fe69e3843f0fa74a01cfca8a8e463bc21afeba685ccf784",
    "target" : "00001cb9c0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
    "mintime" : 1428506992,
    "mutable" : [
        "time",
        "transactions",
        "prevblock"
    ],
    "noncerange" : "00000000ffffffff",
    "sigoplimit" : 20000,
    "sizelimit" : 1000000,
    "curtime" : 1428507768,
    "bits" : "1e1cb9c0",
    "height" : 83763,
    "votes" : [
    ],
    "payee" : "67bLHh7ezFruDULpZXEuiM6d6WZyDDyxzb",
    "payee_amount" : 1000400000,
    "masternode_payments" : true,
    "enforce_masternode_payments" : true
}

that would be awesome


if you look at this commit :-

https://github.com/bitcreditscc/p2pool/commit/8b9a7b538d8352c59103c8d8af7937e36061962c

you'll see that we are only using a max 0.5 Mb of the available 1MB blocksize for transactions.

I will increase this as necessary, otherwise the p2pool issue is a thing of the past, and only fluke blocks that actually fill up all the space ever cause issues.

Also true ... maybe we found someone to do a fork on Mpos

We cant have some people opting out by sticking to old clients. The p2pool issue is much less severe that it was before and should not be used as a reason to not keep advancing.

Besides, failure to act now will just lead to compound problems later. For example the old clients just invalidated 20 ish blocks by the new wallets. this is an issue that can be fixed and it would be a disservice for me not to address this.

the p2pool is already running 0.30.16.4 so i see no reason to keep old clients on the network.

True, but NaN also got a point, i'm trying to find a block found by p2pool with transactions other then the usually payments, but I did't find one. To be checked ...

updating the wallet version has nothing to do with p2pool.



P2pool is a separate software and as you can see from the graph , the sharp dips are much smaller and last only a block or two. This is as a result of block size, and when we implemented the current version, we left a lot of leg room so that ceases to be an issue.

Everyone must use 0.30.16.4 and above.

Simply look at the sharp drops of the hashrate of p2pool.website. I cannot demonstrate it now because I don't have access to a wallet with coins at the moment. I've never seen a p2pool block with any transactions...

p2pool on what wallet version run ?

You know that this will kill the whole network because p2pool does not handle transactions correctly. First, p2pool needs to be fixed because most blocks are mined with my solo miner. After that you can enforce the update.

In the next few hours i will release a mandatory update that will disconnect all pre 0.30.16.4 clients.

My node isn't being too lucky

But still, at these immense hash rates i make more than most miners.

when i was looking into this i could not find a trustless way of doing so. also what happens when someone decides to pull out their investment?

currently the best solutions for this require support of a trusted party, preferably a  heavily funded BN.

1) BN requires specific amount 250K to the dot, made in a single tx.
2) Formation of an agreement and cumulation of required funds is extremely user dependent.

so we have to divide the 250K into shares and hope there is enough interest from other users to fund the amount.

So for example, you and i want to set up a shared BN, but together we only have 180K....what to do?

since you and i would not want to wait and hope just based on whether people will join in, it can be a venture supported by a BN.

the owner covers the balance and sets up the node. We agree on payout % and the owners cut for running costs.

I know you mentioned that you were working on a system to allow multiple people to form a Banknode.  Any more info on when that might be coming down the pipeline?  I feel like getting that information out there could benefit people who may be overwhelmed by the amount to have their own BN.  I like that the idea down the line is that most BNs will be owned by multiple people.

Exactly, I just need to add dispute resolution, escrow, colored coins and reversible transactions, then this will be on par with not only normal banks, but stock exchanges as well. This is why i push hard, we are nearly there.

Yeah, once that's all easy to do and user friendly, it will be amazing.  But even right now just a simple loan is a huge feature.  Say someone wants to get on the CRAVE pump but they don't have any extra BTC lying around.  Ask for a loan from a Banknode for 1 BTC worth of coins, buy some CRAVE, dump it when it goes up, pay back the 1 BTC plus whatever they decided on for interest and you pocket the rest.  Then do it again when you see something else you want in on.   BITCREDIT is the only thing like this right now.  The ecosystem will be booming soon.

Smart man!!! you have uncovered one of the biggest boons.

Developers can now approach BCR BNs and ask for funding to launching a coin. The contract may negotiated however they please , either a hard-coded stipend or even a premine for the BN to hold.

And if a BN owner is skittish about it they can offer shares (through colored coins) of the project to users who are interested. This spreads the risk, and the potential rewards. with Bn owners getting a piece of every pie.

For real to this too.  This dev is pumping out the features, works harder than any other I've seen, and has great vision and ideas.  There's really nothing else like this coin right now and nothing like it being planned anywhere else.  I think the loan system will be huge even if it's just used for speculation on other coins to start out.  I wish we could jump a month or two into the future...