v0.10.9.x Help test RC2 forking issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
tralala said:
Hm, my node stopped receiving payments around 20 hours ago despite being listed properly in the masternode lists. Does anybody know if I'm doing something wrong or is variance just being a bitch?

5.45.102.169:19999 1 n31jCvcXGCUeFHDSJe6TYMpn7VjX9p3nbd 1402834904354577 136 140615
http://23.23.186.131:1234/address/n31jCvcXGCUeFHDSJe6TYMpn7VjX9p3nbd
Click to expand...

My two server has this log. Misbehaving...
I don't know it's related or not .

Cloud you change your masternodeprivkey to new one, and restart masternode ?

http://tdrk.poolhash.org/blocks/masterlist/n31jCvcXGCUeFHDSJe6TYMpn7VjX9p3nbd.txt

Code: 
sv01
2014-06-15 11:19:09 accepted connection 5.45.102.169:38552
2014-06-15 11:19:09 send version message: version 70018, blocks=19855, us=54.183.73.24:19999, them=5.45.102.169:38552, peer=5.45.102.169:38552
2014-06-15 11:19:09 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.10.10.1/: version 70018, blocks=19855, us=54.183.73.24:19999, them=5.45.102.169:19999, peer=5.45.102.169:38552
2014-06-15 11:19:10 Sending master node entry - 5.45.102.169:19999
2014-06-15 11:20:37 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:38552 (0 -> 20)
2014-06-15 11:21:38 disconnecting node 5.45.102.169:38552

sv02
2014-06-15 11:01:36 AcceptToMemoryPool: 5.45.102.169:19999 /Satoshi:0.10.10.1/ : accepted d0f2e4bd9652beae0fa3831b1b6d8d6d2362b404a8b501f06f4bbbfc1d141ebf (poolsz 2)
2014-06-15 11:18:43 disconnecting node 5.45.102.169:19999
2014-06-15 11:24:15 trying connection 5.45.102.169:19999 lastseen=0.3hrs
2014-06-15 11:24:15 connected 5.45.102.169:19999
2014-06-15 11:24:15 send version message: version 70018, blocks=19857, us=MY_SERVER_IP:19999, them=5.45.102.169:19999, peer=5.45.102.169:19999
2014-06-15 11:24:15 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.10.10.1/: version 70018, blocks=19857, us=MY_SERVER_IP:14830, them=5.45.102.169:19999, peer=5.45.102.169:19999
2014-06-15 11:28:01 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:19999 (0 -> 20)
2014-06-15 11:44:15 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:19999 (20 -> 40)
2014-06-15 11:50:37 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:19999 (40 -> 60)
2014-06-15 11:58:01 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:19999 (60 -> 80)
2014-06-15 12:14:16 Misbehaving: 5.45.102.169:19999 (80 -> 100) DISCONNECTING
2014-06-15 12:14:16 disconnecting node 5.45.102.169:19999
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I had one of mine get payed for the first time after 44h, and another got payed within 30mins.

Yes, variance is a b!tch, but I suspect it has to do with testnet low hashrate/high MN count
 
tralala said:
Hm, my node stopped receiving payments around 20 hours ago despite being listed properly in the masternode lists. Does anybody know if I'm doing something wrong or is variance just being a bitch?

5.45.102.169:19999 1 n31jCvcXGCUeFHDSJe6TYMpn7VjX9p3nbd 1402834904354577 136 140615
http://23.23.186.131:1234/address/n31jCvcXGCUeFHDSJe6TYMpn7VjX9p3nbd
Click to expand...

Well I had one of mine not get payed for 44h, and another got payed within 30mins.
Yes, variance is a b!tch,
 
Just received a payment to the new address, so everything's good again on my side. But it would still have been interesting to understand what was wrong...
 
tralala said:
Just received a payment to the new address, so everything's good again on my side. But it would still have been interesting to understand what was wrong...
Click to expand...

Nothing is wrong. Its variance. If you got payed, didn't get payed for 20h and then got payed again... its working. Like I said before, I've had a node fire up successful and not get payed for 44hours, and another that got payed within 30 minutes. I'm "sure" on mainnet payouts will be more regular.
That is one of the main reasons p2pool does not get as much adoption as it deserves.
 
yidakee said:
Nothing is wrong. Its variance. If you got payed, didn't get payed for 20h and then got payed again... its working. Like I said before, I've had a node fire up successful and not get payed for 44hours, and another that got payed within 30 minutes. I'm "sure" on mainnet payouts will be more regular.
That is one of the main reasons p2pool does not get as much adoption as it deserves.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was more talking about the "misbehaving" messages chaeplin found in his logs.
 
yidakee said:
Well I had one of mine get payed for the first time after 44h, and another got payed within 30mins.

Yes, variance is a b!tch, but I suspect it has to do with testnet low hashrate/high MN count
Click to expand...
That shouldn't be a problem though, I mean the hash rate should mirror the difficulty causing a block to be solved every 2.5 minutes, no? Therefore, it shouldn't mater, should it?

BTW, how many masternodes have we got running in testnet?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
That shouldn't be a problem though, I mean the hash rate should mirror the difficulty causing a block to be solved every 2.5 minutes, no? Therefore, it shouldn't mater, should it?
Click to expand...
Exact, thats what DGW3 is for: Adjust the difficulty to the hashrate --> 2.5min average block time

TanteStefana said:
BTW, how many masternodes have we got running in testnet?
Click to expand...
According to http://tdrk.poolhash.org/ we are at 63 currently - 40% of mainnet :smile:
 
Cool, thanks. Now I'm wondering about NOMP. Is the link on the op for testnet? And do we just use our regular miner and basically hook up like we would for P2pool?

I do see on http://tdrk.poolhash.org/blocks/masterlist.txt that some of the ip addresses have : 0, and are still being timed. But do they stop getting voted on after 1800 seconds? (30 min?) I guess I'm really wondering why after days, they're still not cleared from the list, but now I'm thinking it just wasn't programmed in, this is testnet after all and I'm asking for too much and being a butthead, LOL
 
TanteStefana said:
Cool, thanks. Now I'm wondering about NOMP. Is the link on the op for testnet? And do we just use our regular miner and basically hook up like we would for P2pool?
Click to expand...
Yes, as far as i know - give it a try and see if you get shares :wink:

TanteStefana said:
I do see on http://tdrk.poolhash.org/blocks/masterlist.txt that some of the ip addresses have : 0, and are still being timed. But do they stop getting voted on after 1800 seconds? (30 min?) I guess I'm really wondering why after days, they're still not cleared from the list, but now I'm thinking it just wasn't programmed in, this is testnet after all and I'm asking for too much and being a butthead, LOL
Click to expand...

Well spotted, it's a known bug in RC3 - Evan confirmed that the caching of inactive masternode entries is to agressive in RC3: the entries do not get pruned. As this does not affect the voting (only active nodes get votes) and is more of cosmetic nature, it is categorized as minor bug and will be addressed in RC4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
Do we still need to start the masternode by unlocking the wallet first? I always started mine that way?
darkcoind walletpassphrase "walletpassphrase" 60
darkcoind masternode start mylongpassphrase
Click to expand...
I prefer
Code: 
darkcoind masternode start `head -1`
Wallet unlocked like 0.0000001 msec of time.

With darkcoind walletpassphrase pass 60, wallet will be unlocked 60 sec long. So do not use.

example
Code: 
ms06@x60t:~> darkcoind walletpassphrase 1 10
ms06@x60t:~> darkcoind getinfo
{
    "version" : 101000,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 2032.89400000,
    "blocks" : 20315,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 8,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.17133109,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1402636400,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "unlocked_until" : 1402904419208,
    "errors" : ""
}

With masternode start pass
Code: 
ms06@x60t:~> darkcoind getinfo && darkcoind masternode start 1 && darkcoind getinfo
{
    "version" : 101000,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 2032.89400000,
    "blocks" : 20315,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 8,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.17133109,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1402636400,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "unlocked_until" : 0,
    "errors" : ""
}
successfully started masternode
{
    "version" : 101000,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 2032.89400000,
    "blocks" : 20315,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 8,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.17133109,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1402636400,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.000000001
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "unlocked_until" : 0,
    "errors" : ""
}

Is it unlocked ?
 
TanteStefana said:
Do we still need to start the masternode by unlocking the wallet first? I always started mine that way?
darkcoind walletpassphrase "walletpassphrase" 60
darkcoind masternode start mylongpassphrase
Click to expand...

You don't need to unlock it first. Also you should either use darkcoind masternode start $(head -1) or clear your bash history afterwards with history -c

edit: chaeplin said it already :S
 
Reporting 24h activity.

This address is the one where I activated a 2k ticket to masternode, then dropped 1k (My previously described Masternode_A)... I remember it took quite some hours to get first payout
http://23.23.186.131:1234/address/mpv3jJQi9otaVTDhheHyKP7k8toLd73ott

This is the address is the regular 1k masternode, that got payed within 30 minutes of being active (My Masternode_B)
http://23.23.186.131:1234/address/mtSQDmxDEY69Kn31uo6aRJHxD1nYdFFzvo

What do you guys think? Coincidence? B is getting more than double than A.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top