★★DigiByte|极特币★★[DGB]✔ Core v6.16.5.1 - DigiShield, DigiSpeed, Segwit - page 361.

HR

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1011

Transparency & Integrity

Quote from: cryptmebro on April 05, 2017, 08:57:06 PM

Don't fucking deploy Segregated Witness. Problem solved.

It's already causing more issues than it's worth. It's a technical piece of shit.

And my question is whether DGB really even needs it at this time, and I have yet to see any forthright arguments explaining why it is, if it is.

cryptmebro

hero member

Activity: 786

Merit: 1000

Don't fucking deploy Segregated Witness. Problem solved.

It's already causing more issues than it's worth. It's a technical piece of shit.

TagBot

full member

Activity: 175

Merit: 100

DigiByte

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1051

Official DigiByte Account

Quote from: IloveDigibyte on April 05, 2017, 11:56:22 AM

Make a list of all the coins that have already done this bitcoin code base update and ask them for help. I can donate 5 btc.

1. Gulden
2. Litecoin
3. Groestl

Which other coins have done this and I will add to the list?

None of these coins would run into this issue. If we had a single algo we would be good to go. We also are merged with BTC 0.14.0. As far as we know no one else is up to speed with that. LTC is not even fully on par with 0.13.

TamiLee

hero member

Activity: 637

Merit: 500

Quote from: IloveDigibyte on April 05, 2017, 11:56:22 AM

Make a list of all the coins that have already done this bitcoin code base update and ask them for help. I can donate 5 btc.

1. Gulden
2. Litecoin
3. Groestl

Which other coins have done this and I will add to the list?

Save your money, Jared has enough funds http://www.newsbtc.com/2014/12/02/digibyte-raises-250k-plans-go-global/ , dgb need to find someone who can do the job. I also support Gulden and the community there is desperately waiting on this new Prime project. They won't have time to help out. Groestl devs are your best option.

IloveDigibyte

full member

Activity: 303

Merit: 100

POS / PRIMENODES

Make a list of all the coins that have already done this bitcoin code base update and ask them for help. I can donate 5 btc.

1. Gulden
2. Litecoin
3. Groestl

Which other coins have done this and I will add to the list?

GRSisWIN

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 0

Quote from: DigiByte on April 05, 2017, 09:10:53 AM

Quick update, we have one final hurdle to get through before we release v6.14.1. The upcoming soft fork will consist of 4 phases as defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.1devnet/src/versionbits.h#L20

Code:

enum ThresholdState {
   THRESHOLD_DEFINED,
   THRESHOLD_STARTED,
   THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN,
   THRESHOLD_ACTIVE,
   THRESHOLD_FAILED,
};

These soft forks will be carried out according to bip 9 as described here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0009.mediawiki

The parameters for our soft fork are defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/chainparams.cpp#L145

THRESHOLD_DEFINED - Currently our mining tests work through here without issues.

THRESHOLD_STARTED - This is where we are having mining problems with testing. (Period already started, period is 1 week requiring 70% of previous 40,320 blocks to advance to next phase). We get "Unrecognized block version" on most miners when mining through this phase, although some mining software still mines blocks.

THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN - Same as Started

THRESHOLD_ACTIVE - Once we hit activation everything works as it should on all mining software.

The new block version bits as defined in bip 9 are defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/versionbits.h#L14

Code:

static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_TOP_BITS = 0x20000000UL;
/** What bitmask determines whether versionbits is in use */
static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_TOP_MASK = 0xE0000000UL;
/** Total bits available for versionbits */
static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_NUM_BITS = 28;

The issue is a combination of Multi-Algo versioning, plus bip 9 soft fork roll out versioning.

Our Multi-Algo block bit versioning is defined with this bitwise operator here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/primitives/block.h#L30

Code:

enum
{
   // primary version
   BLOCK_VERSION_DEFAULT = 4,

   // algo
   BLOCK_VERSION_ALGO = (7 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SCRYPT = (1 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SHA256D = (1 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_GROESTL = (2 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SKEIN = (3 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_QUBIT = (4 << 9),
};

When mining through a test network and all the phases here are the block versions we are getting converted to binary and hex:

Code:

Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1110 0000 0111 - 20000007 - Scrypt -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1110 0000 0000 - 20000000 - Scrypt -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0010 0000 0111 - 20000207 - Sha256 -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0010 0000 0000 - 20000200 - Sha256 -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0100 0000 0111 - 20000407 - Groestl -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0100 0000 0000 - 20000400 - Groestl -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0110 0000 0111 - 20000607 - Skein -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0110 0000 0000 - 20000600 - Skein -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1000 0000 0111 - 20000807 - Qubit -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1000 0000 0000 - 20000800 - Qubit -- DEFINED - ACTIVE

So the identifier to far right that flags segwit support etc is causing issues (the 7 at end). Anyone have any suggestions?

Current dev branch we are working and testing out of: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/commits/6.14.1devnet

GRS devs can sort this out for you for a price , you won't have much luck with arrogant Gulden devs or untouchable litecoin devs who have already done the update.

DigiByte

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1051

Official DigiByte Account

Quick update, we have one final hurdle to get through before we release v6.14.1. The upcoming soft fork will consist of 4 phases as defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.1devnet/src/versionbits.h#L20

Code:

enum ThresholdState {
   THRESHOLD_DEFINED,
   THRESHOLD_STARTED,
   THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN,
   THRESHOLD_ACTIVE,
   THRESHOLD_FAILED,
};

These soft forks will be carried out according to bip 9 as described here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0009.mediawiki

The parameters for our soft fork are defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/chainparams.cpp#L145

THRESHOLD_DEFINED - Currently our mining tests work through here without issues.

THRESHOLD_STARTED - This is where we are having mining problems with testing. (Period already started, period is 1 week requiring 70% of previous 40,320 blocks to advance to next phase). We get "Unrecognized block version" on most miners when mining through this phase, although some mining software still mines blocks.

THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN - Same as Started

THRESHOLD_ACTIVE - Once we hit activation everything works as it should on all mining software.

The new block version bits as defined in bip 9 are defined here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/versionbits.h#L14

Code:

static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_TOP_BITS = 0x20000000UL;
/** What bitmask determines whether versionbits is in use */
static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_TOP_MASK = 0xE0000000UL;
/** Total bits available for versionbits */
static const int32_t VERSIONBITS_NUM_BITS = 28;

The issue is a combination of Multi-Algo versioning, plus bip 9 soft fork roll out versioning.

Our Multi-Algo block bit versioning is defined with this bitwise operator here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/6.14.0/src/primitives/block.h#L30

Code:

enum
{
   // primary version
   BLOCK_VERSION_DEFAULT = 4,

   // algo
   BLOCK_VERSION_ALGO = (7 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SCRYPT = (1 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SHA256D = (1 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_GROESTL = (2 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_SKEIN = (3 << 9),
   BLOCK_VERSION_QUBIT = (4 << 9),
};

When mining through a test network and all the phases here are the block versions we are getting converted to binary and hex:

Code:

Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1110 0000 0111 - 20000007 - Scrypt -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1110 0000 0000 - 20000000 - Scrypt -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0010 0000 0111 - 20000207 - Sha256 -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0010 0000 0000 - 20000200 - Sha256 -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0100 0000 0111 - 20000407 - Groestl -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0100 0000 0000 - 20000400 - Groestl -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0110 0000 0111 - 20000607 - Skein -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0110 0000 0000 - 20000600 - Skein -- DEFINED - ACTIVE
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1000 0000 0111 - 20000807 - Qubit -- STARTED - LOCKEN_IN
Version= 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 1000 0000 0000 - 20000800 - Qubit -- DEFINED - ACTIVE

So the identifier to far right that flags segwit support etc is causing issues (the 7 at end). Anyone have any suggestions?

Current dev branch we are working and testing out of: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/commits/6.14.1devnet

Jumbley

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1003

Quote from Jared today on Telegram.

“To give everyone an update on development we are held up by one remaining issue. We post details in the development channel if anyone wants to look at it on a technical level. Basically during the soft fork the network progresses from "defined" to "started" to "locked in" and finally active. During the "defined" and active phases all 5 mining algos work great. However during the "started" and “locked in phases” most mining software is not recognising the block version due to the signalling of the soft fork combined with multi-algo identifier.
Trying to come up with a solution that does not involve updating all the mining software out there.”

ReSl

sr. member

Activity: 254

Merit: 250

When is DGB Gaming Back?

and please watch your gramma!

Quote

We are pausing all payouts until we fix some issues with exploits in payout API interface. Than you for your understanding.

ThanK you! Wink

pinkman12345

legendary

Activity: 1070

Merit: 1021

Quote from: FryguyUK on April 03, 2017, 11:04:01 PM

I fricking love loading up on DGB

Haha same here man! Don't miss the GAME train though!!

FryguyUK

legendary

Activity: 801

Merit: 1000

I fricking love loading up on DGB

Jumbley

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1003

Quote from: czenrique on April 03, 2017, 04:55:16 PM

Hello, please how can I transfer my DGB paper wallet created on website: https://walletgenerator.net/?currency=DigiByte to my digibyte wallet on my PC?

1.   Core wallet
2.   Help
3.   Debugwindow
4.   console
5.   importprivkey "digibyteprivkey" ( "label" ) ( rescan )

That’s my best guess!

czenrique

newbie

Activity: 37

Merit: 0

Hello, please how can I transfer my DGB paper wallet created on website: https://walletgenerator.net/?currency=DigiByte to my digibyte wallet on my PC?

Geenstijl

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1000

All solid coins are rising. i think DGB has potential. Bought a small stake.

cryptogasm

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

How high can we go this time?

Jumbley

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1003

Quote from: Jumbley on March 31, 2017, 05:17:07 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I understand that DGB is trying to activate segwit.. where can I see the progress of signalling ?

You can't see that just yet because DigiByte 6.14.1 has not been set free into the wild just yet. a dirty copy of it is being tested within the community so keep watching this space, news will be posted here, if I know about it. Wink

Message from Jared posted today in Telegram chat.

"Just a quick update for everyone, we are working through a slight mining bug in one of the algos during soft fork process. This doesn't effect any normal wallet functions in test wallet released. Once we are 100% confident in a smooth transition we will do an official release of 6.14.1. Thank you to all those helping us test!"

Arvydas77

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 504

★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!

DGB was always profitable to me. I bought enough on the bottom. It makes a pleasure to watch market moving.

titibach

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 500

Quote from: Jonesd on March 29, 2017, 02:31:51 PM

Quote from: LiV3WiR3 on March 29, 2017, 01:36:16 PM

I was expecting a flash pump on DGB like XBC, but a steady increase like DCR is even better.

Steady is better indeed. I bought so many dgb during its fall, my heart would not survive the thrill of a pump. :-D

me too and i get that same feeling lol
its like you wait forever but when it comes it makes you feel great that your decision was correct.
buy when there was blood, it was hard but is paying off.

Investopedia

newbie

Activity: 31

Merit: 0

I prefer to see it as the silence before the storm.

DGB has the potential to be vastly more useful in real world transaction processing than BTC that is now deadlocked at 5 transactions per second.

Topic: ★★DigiByte|极特币★★[DGB]✔ Core v6.16.5.1 - DigiShield, DigiSpeed, Segwit - page 361. (Read 3058816 times)