Topic: System for Armory upgrade (Read 1181 times)

I believe I've got it all working smoothly.  Had A bit of difficulty trying to install a BCH node over the core blockchain, kept getting stuck with 4 days, so I uninstalled the node and deleted the chain to start from scratch with ABC node.  Took 2 days for some reason on the old system, but it synced.  Then rebuilt and rescanned with armory 0.94.1 just to check balances and also to get into Armory to create a new wallet to send the BCH off for storage/spend.

I then deleted the Armory Database and installed 0.96.1 and it synced for me, once that synced I upgraded to 0.96.1.2 testing version and followed goatpigs guide.  Sent my test transaction and changed the signer BCH on the conformation page and it appears to be confirming using the bch explorer.

Just wanted to thank you folks for the help and confirm that goatpigs test build is sending BCH using armory.

Running armory against a BCH full-node will result in armory seeing your BCH balances.

You should be aware that no version of Armory can spend BCH inputs yet due to changes in transaction format. You will need to update your BCH armory instance to a more recent version, if and when such a version becomes available.

I have my wallets restored on the new system and have sent my coins to new addresses, which I believe I have cleaned my btc leaving bch behind on the addresses they were air dropped.

If I am correct, I should be able to go back to old system and simply uninstall core and install one of the bch clients and let it sync that fork of the blockchain.  The state of the old system hasn't been touched since before the fork.  I would be running different nodes on 2 computers and the older version of armory (0.94.1) wouldn't see newly created addresses from 2nd system with armory 0.96.1.  Would I be correct in thinking 0.94.1 version would not even recognize the addresses that are holding btc and only see the addresses that contain bch.  Would that allow me to send the alt-coin to a new wallet that I could hold/spend bch going forward and leave my old wallet clean to continue using.

I'm sure it's not that simple, or even possible, but to simplify things.  I have my wallets restored on new/different computer running 0.96.1.  Old computer has the original wallets with armory 0.94.1.  I want to create a new armory wallet to hold/use the bitcoin cash alt coin which i would send transaction from one wallet to another.  I think that would protect my private keys without ever having to import/export then simply remove my original wallets from that instance of armory.  Will that work?

Thank you much, that makes sense. I should be able to continue from here and work with new addresses and leave the old to be sorted at a later date.  I think I may have confused myself reading through all the threads over the last couple months and was mistaking cold storage with signing from offline wallets and way older versions of Armory.

Thank you goatpig, again your work is greatly appreciated.

You're conflating key pairs and Bitcoin scripts. You sign messages with a key pair. You receive coins to scripts and spend the coins by redeeming the scripts (usually involves a signature using the private key).

The wallets have not changed at the key pair level. The new stuff added extra scripts. The old signers cannot make sense of these scripts, so if you receive coins to new scripts, you need a new signer to create the redeeming script in order to spend.

The old DB cannot generate the new scripts, therefor it can't see coins on these scripts. If you receive coins to such scripts, you need to use a 0.96+ DB to see your balance in full.

This could be a critical question now.  I want to change my payout address on "slush" for example.  To change that address I have to sign a message.  If I generate an address from 96 version for new pool payout address, will I be able to sign to verify the change with the 96 wallet, or go back to the 94 version?  My current payout address was generated with 94 version wallet.

If you create addresses with the new script types introduced in 0.96, previous versions won't be able to see those on chain or sign for them. You will have to use 0.96 to restore these funds properly. As a rule of thumb, do not use older versions.

If you do not use the new scripts, older versions will work fine.

Everything is working perfectly.  I've restored my original wallet on the new system.  Haven't actually used it yet other than running Armory and syncing to check balance.  It does start off saying everything is up to date, but shows as offline.  After letting it contiure to run everything is accurate and it keeps up with current block by launching only Armory vs. launching core then running armory after core syncs blockchain.  I'll use new system after the Hardfork, since my understanding is my combo of core 0.13.2 and Armory 0.94.1  will not work properly. 

My question now is, going forward, if I create new receive address on my new system with 0.96.1 Armory will that address be recognized with with my older 0.94.1 version.  I am wondering if it makes a difference when and from what version I generate the address from.  Am I better off continuing to use any unused addresses previously generated or create new address on the new system with 0.96.1 Armory.

My example of why I ask is when in the future, I restore my wallet from seed, will all address associated with the wallet be found, recognized and usable.  Right now I've only generated addresses from 0.94.1 and earlier.

Restore your old wallet. Deal with the fork once it has demonstrated it will survive.

Success, installed Armory 0.96.1 and synced with core in 12 minutes with no errors nor corrupt data.  (17 hours for core to sync blockchain from scratch)  I haven't used it yet other than syncing which brings me to my next question.  Am I best to create a new wallet or import my old wallet from seed.  I've just skipped it each time it asked to create or import.  I am guessing if No split to use the seed, if Yes split have new wallet to receive clean coin?

Thank you much & I greatly appreciate all your work goatpig

https://btcarmory.com/docs/pathing

I have installed bitcoin core 14.2 and the default location for the data was directed to E:/user/appdata/roaming/bitcoin.  My question is after core has downloaded and synced the blockchain.  Will I install armory to C:/user/appdata/roaming/armory by default?  C: is my SSD windows 10 and E: is HDD storage.  Is this the proper way to install armory on the SSD?

Well, I have a very old Core 2 Duo box with 4GB RAM and a low-mid range GPU. The GPU is mining an altcoin full-on while the C2D is mining with 1 of 2 threads/core, leaving only 1 core for the system. It has no problem running Core 0.14.2/Armory 0.96 in such an environment. Of course, it's not as fast as my nodes that are running on AMD octa-core and Haswell quad-core boxes with 16GB RAM (also mining) but it gets the job done.

Thanks again for the help.  The last of my parts will arrive so I can build this week, then I can start downloading blockchain from scratch.  To begin, which version of core should I install?  My next question is, which Armory?  Am I best going with 95.1 or latest test build of 96.  Lastly am I best off to create new wallet or use my seed from original wallet. 

Much thanks skyhawk & HCP!!!

I didn't save nor post the errors in the past, but will if I do have problems in the future.  I agree that most of my problems were probably do to hardware/software...probably should have bought SSD 6weeks ago instead of hybrid, but had planned on building AM4 system later this year, but seeing the August 1 deadline where there would be some kind of major change, I feel pressured to get my wallet upgraded now vs. waiting.  I really appreciate helping me chose.

This is what I believe I am leaning toward now:

370 board with 1600X Ryzen 5,  16GB maybe 32 GB ram (6 core cpu offsets cost to bump ram), 240 GB M.2 drive for Windows 10 and Armory and 500GB  SSD for the blockchain.

Again I really appreciate the help, I guess I could have originally posed my questions better but didn't want it to end up in hardware forum when I am only looking for guidance for system requirements best suited to the Armory software.

 

FYI, as a comparison... I have Bitcoin 0.14.1 updated and running... and fired up Armory 0.96 for the first time today. It took less than 15 minutes to "Build the Databases".

My system specs are:
Core i5-3570K @ 3.4 GHz
8GB of RAM
Windows 10 64Bit

Bitcoin Core datadir is on a 1TB Western Digital "Blue" HDD
OS (and Armory) are on a 240GB SSD

You really don't need a super computer to make all this work.

What errors are you getting trying to run 0.96?

I don't think cores, CPU clockspeed or RAM really matters. Armory is, by far, heaviest on disk-IO when building it's databases. A modern Intel dual-core CPU, at whatever clockspeed you can get a modern CPU at, with 8GB RAM (Win7) would probably be adequate for both bitcoin-core and Armory. I'd bump the RAM to 16GB on general principle (and/or if you're running Windows 10 and/or running general purpose computing tasks on the box as well), and of course the more the merrier for the other components as well.

Thanks.  I am not going to disagree that my problems are due to software and/or faulty hardware, but thats why new build.  6 weeks or so ago, I thought along those lines as well, new seagate 1Tb hybrid HDD clean windows 7 install.  Same problems building database where resources at or near 100% cpu and memory.  Plenty of power 750 gold Tt.

I realize armory doesn't need the room, but have to have room for bitcoin core to store the blockchain.  After last sync a couple hours ago I'm showing 146 GB of used space for that folder, 6 weeks ago it was in the 120's on clean install.  I did just copy the folder over from old HDD and sync from that, so my blockchain could be a source of problems too, thus the new build.

Cores vs Ghz and/or Ram?  What does Armory more heavily lean on when building databases.  I'm building system and going to download blockchain from scratch on dedicated SSD to make sure everything is as clean and straight forward as possible.

Respectfully, it sounds like your problems are a combination of software [malware, or anti-malware software?], pebkac, poorly-done overclocking with maybe a sprinkle of faulty/crappy hardware [$20 "600WATT!!" powersupply?].

Armory 0.96 has very modest requirements -- running Bitcoin-core is far more challenging in all aspects as far as hardware goes.

Other than running reliably (Overclocking a system is generally a bad idea, ANYTHING that introduces even very rare corruptions or incorrect results will bork the all of the everything), storage is the biggest concern.

Unless money is no issue, I would suggest a system with both mechanical and SSD storage. It is possible for the blockchain to live on cheap magnetic storage, while the highly-active Chainstate data can live on an SSD.. See https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Splitting_the_data_directory

The armory 0.96 datadir right now isn't much bigger than ~1.3GB, so armory's storage requirements are effectively trivial.