v0.10.12.x RC4 Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
eduffield said:
Hmm? I'm not sure where you got this from, but it's not the case at all. The 5000DRK limit is for a hard limit for the entire wallet. Lets say a user has 100k DRK, the wallet would actually end up making a bunch of 500DRK inputs and 100DRK inputs. The only reason I added the hard limit was because there's no easy way to denominate a portion of the wallet without doing the rest.
Click to expand...
so splitting in 5k pieces before denomination is not a solution right?
it was discussed on the previous page..
wouldn't it be possible that the user could determine the hard limit of the wallet?
 
Before DS+ I was hoping Evan would create a similar wallet like the pre-DS+ wallets, which we would just check mark the Darksend box and send any amount of drk and let the network do the anonymizing. Now it doesn't work like that, and DS+ doesn't work with amounts larger than 5000. So does it mean users will need two wallets, one with DS+ and one with no DS+ to be able to do both?
 
eduffield said:
Hmm? I'm not sure where you got this from, but it's not the case at all. The 5000DRK limit is a hard limit for the entire wallet. Lets say a user has 100k DRK, the wallet would actually end up making a bunch of 500DRK inputs and 100DRK inputs. The only reason I added the hard limit was because there's no easy way to denominate a portion of the wallet without doing the rest.
Click to expand...
I just interpreted the size calculation for the transaction - if i got it wrong: my bad :)
 
moli said:
Before DS+ I was hoping Evan would create a similar wallet like the pre-DS+ wallets, which we would just check mark the Darksend box and send any amount of drk and let the network do the anonymizing. Now it doesn't work like that, and DS+ doesn't work with amounts larger than 5000. So does it mean users will need two wallets, one with DS+ and one with no DS+ to be able to do both?
Click to expand...

Well once all of the masternodes are running the new version and everyone is updated, I can release that after the fact and it will work without any change to the network.
 
eduffield said:
Well once all of the masternodes are running the new version and everyone is updated, I can release that after the fact and it will work without any change to the network.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Evan. And so far the windows wallet v.17 seems to be doing well.
 
eduffield said:
Yeah, they'd pay the old masternode network until they updated.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting this Evan... So essentially there will be two MN active "forks" ? If mining pools do not get orphaned, what will their incentive to update! At best, they might even revert back to the 10% version. It was such a hard battle to get to 95% consensus, if we need to do another round without the "fear" of orphaned blocks... most will just go
"whhat? again? oh bugger off"

.
 
yidakee said:
I'm not getting this Evan... So essentially there will be two MN active "forks" ? If mining pools do not get orphaned, what will their incentive to update! At best, they might even revert back to the 10% version. It was such a hard battle to get to 95% consensus, if we need to do another round without the "fear" of orphaned blocks... most will just go
"whhat? again? oh bugger off"

.
Click to expand...

They'll update or we'll kick them off the network.
 
So it seems that the current testnet version v0.10.12.17-2-g695af70-beta is working swimmingly.

What now needs to be tested as far as bad actors, closing of wallets, shutting down MN's, etc..?

Also eduffield, did you ever receive the message of the person offering half a dozen ec2 instances to be used for testing purposes? The offer was from user stonehedge.
 
The offer still stands. I can offer clean installs but will hand credentials to trusted devs to configure however they can be useful.


EDIT: I will build them now whilst I have the time. Just in case they can be helpful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
6 EC2 instances built and ready to go. I'll keep them running for a month or two. First dev to message me gets them :D
 
Well I have no clue what the fargle I was doing wrong last night but tried again today and everything's smooth, fast, and frisky. I'd still like to see Total balance / anonymised / unconfirmed in the Send tab though. Please. :smile:
 
I have a wallet on Windows updated to the latest version (v0.10.12.17-gf266a9a-beta) for which a Darksend Denominate transaction has been stuck for more than 36 hours.

LCGKLJH.png


I can attach the wallet or send it to a dev if interested...
 
I just sent a post and immediately deleted it when I saw the denominating resume on my wallet (after an hour). Also, just got the first collateral fee (Win wallet v.17).

upload_2014-8-8_14-24-57.png
 
Imo its worth delaying RC4 release a few days to work solely on optimizing wallet UI and in-wallet messaging. Doing all this stuff optimally is critical to the success of rc4 release since its very important for users to know and understand what's going on and to have all the necessary things neatly presented.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top