11.2 - Dash Release
- Thread starter eduffield
- Start date
rango
Active member
Tried to mix 100 DASH (2 rounds). It is running since 9 hours and only got 53 DASH completed. Running on version 11.2.22. This version is described to bring DS performance improvements, but mainnet results do not look promising.
Is current darksend code/implementation the problem or do we have too low general DASH mixing volume? 75% of MNs are on version 11.2.22, so that should not be the problem.
What is your darksend mixing speed experience with 11.2.22?
Best,
Rango
Is current darksend code/implementation the problem or do we have too low general DASH mixing volume? 75% of MNs are on version 11.2.22, so that should not be the problem.
What is your darksend mixing speed experience with 11.2.22?
Best,
Rango
innergy
Member
Guys, I'm using the wallet in lite mode (litemode=1 in dash.conf file) and look what I get when I tried to send some funds:
Then I tried the same in normal mode with checked "Darksend" and got the same strange fee (maybe it's normal, I don't know, I haven't any anonymized funds):
In normal mode, with unchecked "Darksend" all looks good:
Is it possible that the lite mode doesn't switch off correctly the Darksend and InstantX options?
Then I tried the same in normal mode with checked "Darksend" and got the same strange fee (maybe it's normal, I don't know, I haven't any anonymized funds):
In normal mode, with unchecked "Darksend" all looks good:
Is it possible that the lite mode doesn't switch off correctly the Darksend and InstantX options?
Innergy I had this once in normal mode as well when I was sending multiple payments, switched label to switch again on Send and was good view later.Guys, I'm using the wallet in lite mode (litemode=1 in dash.conf file) and look what I get when I tried to send some funds:
Then I tried the same in normal mode with checked "Darksend" and got the same strange fee (maybe it's normal, I don't know, I haven't any anonymized funds):
In normal mode, with unchecked "Darksend" all looks good:
Is it possible that the lite mode doesn't switch off correctly the Darksend and InstantX options?
Im not at a non MN Dash wallet at the moment but I will try this in a couple of hours. One thing that is something I hope we can add as a feature is perma lock for MN wallets so funds aren't spent from those. Its really annoying when you lock it....close and re-open that if you use DASH for buying something it will pull the DASH from MN wallets because they are now unlocked again...arrrgghh
I get you, but that's not the point with MN's. You can always use Coin Control for precise management of your coins.
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
Yes, I also encounter this, but not every time.
Lukas_Jackson
Active member
I didn't have a problem with this version yet
moli
Well-known member
With this new version although the wallet Options let us have Darksend rounds up to 8 rounds and "Amount of Dash to keep anonymized" only up to 2000 DASH, we can override these with the parameters. For example, if we want to increase the rounds to 16 and the amount to be anonymized to 4000...
In Windows, open shortcut properties. In "Target:", type -darksendrounds=16 -anonymizedashamount=4000. click "Apply" and "OK". Restart the wallet.
Or in dash.conf, type:
darksendrounds=16
anonymizedashamount=4000
Save the file. Restart your wallet. There you have it.
In Windows, open shortcut properties. In "Target:", type -darksendrounds=16 -anonymizedashamount=4000. click "Apply" and "OK". Restart the wallet.
Or in dash.conf, type:
darksendrounds=16
anonymizedashamount=4000
Save the file. Restart your wallet. There you have it.
I think something is wrong with masternode payment frequency since enforcement was last activated. Looking at the masternode count for the last days, one would expect about 4 days between payments, but if you look at https://dashninja.pl/masternodes.html and sort by last payment, there are hundreds of active MN's not getting paid for over 5 days. I can confirm this with my own MN's. Most of them running perfectly for over 8 weeks but receive payments about every 5,5 days now.
Does someone have an explanation for this? Could the MN count be wrong?
Does someone have an explanation for this? Could the MN count be wrong?
RenegadeMan
Member
My MN is at 5 days 10 hours so I just did the very same thing (sort on 'last paid') and was surprised to see there are so many more above me with longer periods where they haven't been paid.
Evan, I know we're still in beta but (and I'd expect quite a few people are feeling this way) I'm starting to lose faith that the payments process for MNs is ever going to become stable. It seems like we have some level of certainty for a week or two at the most and then something happens and people either lose their place, are missed altogether or the whole thing stops as a result of some major issue such as when the entire network stopped at a particular block those few weekends ago.
I think this needs really serious focus because it's at the point where confidence is being lost and (with the number of times it's been 'rectified') people will start giving up on any certainty around an MN's ROI.
innergy
Member
Not agree.. MN count / Blocks per day - 2312/576 = expected payment per MN - every 4 days
I have three MNs that haven't got paid more than 5 days..
And one question: does "start-many" throws you out of the payment queue?
I haven't look at the code but my understanding is that it's not the payment frequency that's evenly distributed (ie. round robin) but the payment value.
Can a dev confirm or correct this?
oblox
Well-known member
There is no way to even out masternode payment values since the block rewards are based on difficulty. It's based on frequency since last block paid.
Yes, after looking at the code it seems that way. My assumption was incorrect.
edit: But I don't see the block rewards based on difficulty being a problem to even out payments. One would just need to keep track of said payments to even them out (with some variance)
Last edited by a moderator:
Me and a couple of other people posted on BCT about having gone 5d7h (in my case) without any payments. Evan replied, asking us to PM him our info. Within fifteen minutes, all my MNs and the other people's MNs were paid. I'm still not sure exactly what happened--both in terms of why I went so long without payments, and why I instantly received payments once I informed Evan (did he tweak the reference node?).
I'd really like a little more information on the reference node, exactly how it works and what degree of control Evan has over it (e.g. can he move around MNs on the list), how the "persistence" works (how long can your MN be off before it drops off the list), etc.
I'd really like a little more information on the reference node, exactly how it works and what degree of control Evan has over it (e.g. can he move around MNs on the list), how the "persistence" works (how long can your MN be off before it drops off the list), etc.