Search results

I can confirm that "addnode" to another MN will create the high CPU load and high memory usage problem. Eventually, the MN will be kicked off with this high CPU load and memory consumption. Something is still wrong in v0.11.2.17. EDIT: What I did is "addnode...

BTW, elberethzone's dmn0{3,4} and p2pool nodes are down.

Then, the only other changes I had is a script that run dashd getblocktemplate. I stopped running getblocktemplate from it. Or, the patches in 0.11.2.17 completely fixed the problem. I did get kicked off before removing addnode in dash.conf and getblocktemplate in the script. Perhaps, I will...

How long has it been running without being kicked off? Do you have addnode to other MNs in dash.conf?

I am running this version before the version bump. My MNs still dropped off until I removed the addnode lines in dash.conf. So, I think the bug hasn't been completely resolved yet. But, let's see how 0.11.2.17 works for others.

My MNs with addnode removed stay up after almost 10 hours now. The memory consumption increased by ~10 MB. So, I believe there is something wrong with MNs peers connected together for an extended period of time. Notice that when you have two MNs connected with addnode as peers, they usually...

Do you have addnode pointing to other MNs in your dash.conf? After I removed addnode in my dash.conf, the memory usage stays around 350 MB for 3 hours without a high CPU load. EDIT: The memory usage is still slowly increasing but at least the high CPU load is gone. It increased much faster when...

It seems to me that when there are two MNs connected together as peers, the CPU load starts to go up and there may be a memory leak somewhere as the memory usage keeps increasing at the same time until this MN is kicked off the MN network. Do you guys have "addnode" to other MNs? Try to remove...

I got the "masternode vote" crash without litemode. But, when I restarted dash, I no longer have the high CPU load I reported earlier.

Evan and DASH Team, Great job and thank you! I am so glad to see that we have PoSe to make sure MN operators are running one node per IP. One problem I am seeing right now is the high load of the dashed process. It is taking 77% to 112% CPU time on a 2.4 GHz Westmere. Is that normal?

How about Drakecoin? We can keep DRK for DRaKecoin. Then, if you don't like drakecoin, you can keep calling it darkcoin.

Oh, thanks!

Don't worry. It was supposed to be a joke. EDIT: I know I said it before. Just feel terrible reading another 7 pages of discussion without message from Evan clarifying whether DASH is set in stone or not.

I suggested this earlier but then deleted it because we have dishwashing detergent Dawn.

Let's call it Duang. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duang

Please just ignore me. I'm so tired that I find it hard to say anything that makes sense today.

I see the problem. But, we should somehow preserve DRK so that one day we can tell our children we had DRK. How about one of the 2-tier system keeps using DRK and the other use a new name? BTW, the Dash doesn't sound cool but it isn't too bad as you can say it stands for Digital cash. EDIT...

How about Darecoin as in DareDevil? The act of Evan to bankster is more like Murdock to Kingpin. Plus, we can keep Darkcoin name by setting 1 Darkcoin equal 1000 Darecoin to honor the early adopters. 1 DRK = 1000 DRE.

Whatever we do about OTP, please do not pick something close source and make sure we modify something to ensure that we don't have a plausible rainbow attack. Perhaps, take something simple like orthrus and modify it: https://code.google.com/p/orthrus/wiki/ortcalc

Thanks for pointing that out. My mistake. EDIT: I don't know if I should mention another coin here. There is one coin that works on both Tor and I2P network. While I don't think its performance statistics will make complete sense to darkcoin (since we have darksend and InstantX), it is a good...