V12 Testing Thread

bertlebbert said:
K then that's OK, right? Just that masternodelist full shows only one local wallet address running two MNs, that seems odd, no?
Click to expand...
It may be unusual to have the same pubkey for two masternodes (most people split their 1000 DASH to unique addresses) but it is not prohibited. You can send 10 x 1000 DASH to the same address and run 10 masternodes from these vins and all will show with the same pubkey.
 
flare said:
It may be unusual to have the same pubkey for two masternodes (most people split their 1000 DASH to unique addresses) but it is not prohibited. You can send 10 x 1000 DASH to the same address and run 10 masternodes from these vins and all will show with the same pubkey.
Click to expand...
Cool, thanks for explaining... I hadn't seen or heard of that before, so I was kinda surprised when I noticed it.
 
bertlebbert said:
Cool, thanks for explaining... I hadn't seen or heard of that before, so I was kinda surprised when I noticed it.
Click to expand...
No problem - in the end only the vin is what counts, they HAVE to be unique :)

upload_2015-8-7_10-47-36.png


Splitting the 1000 DASH to uniq pubkeys has the benefit of simplifying the monitoring of payments: What node did get paid, and what not?
 
For sure... instead of thinking 1000 coin address = MN, should be thinking 1000 coin vin = 1 MN.
And if we have multiple 1000 vins each operating a different MN, they could all be same wallet address (pub key).
(Why anyone would want to do that?)
 
bertlebbert said:
For sure... instead of thinking 1000 coin address = MN, should be thinking 1000 coin vin = 1 MN.
And if we have multiple 1000 vins each operating a different MN, they could all be same wallet address (pub key).
(Why anyone would want to do that?)
Click to expand...
I would love to do that, but scratchy's site doesn't let us use the same address for more than one genkey. it would give this message:
"ERROR: THERES ALREADY A NODE RUNNING WITH THIS ADDRESS"
 
With start-many, all payments got to the first address, so how do you monitor payments with that? (yup, I've never used start-many....)
 
moli said:
I would love to do that, but scratchy's site doesn't let us use the same address for more than one genkey. it would give this message:
"ERROR: THERES ALREADY A NODE RUNNING WITH THIS ADDRESS"
Click to expand...
Lol, that's his catch all msg for everything.
 
yidakee said:
With start-many, all payments got to the first address, so how do you monitor payments with that? (yup, I've never used start-many....)
Click to expand...

That's a good question... if you start-many say10 MNs, there's no way to attribute any particular payment to a specific address vin... haha, just assume I suppose
 
moli said:
I would love to do that, but scratchy's site doesn't let us use the same address for more than one genkey. it would give this message:
"ERROR: THERES ALREADY A NODE RUNNING WITH THIS ADDRESS"
Click to expand...
If you want to use just one address for more than one MN on scratchy's cloud, I did it, you can to. For kicks I'm going to see if I can get 10 or more all running with same public key. When I have the procedure down pat, I'll tell ya what I did...
 
bertlebbert said:
That's a good question... if you start-many say10 MNs, there's no way to attribute any particular payment to a specific address vin... haha, just assume I suppose
Click to expand...

hmmm ... I don't think so. That would be total chaos and be of disservice to the argument. The idea of start-many is to simplify things, not to make it worse. With typical start-many, 1k addresses (each with it's own vin) are created, which makes it easier I guess, but since it's the first address that gets payed, it's kind of like the same situation, you can't really tell from incoming payments from which MN it belongs to.

So, I assume the way to track down each MN will be the same, as it utterly dependent on the vin, not the pubkey.

.
 
yidakee said:
hmmm ... I don't think so. That would be total chaos and be of disservice to the argument. The idea of start-many is to simplify things, not to make it worse. With typical start-many, 1k addresses (each with it's own vin) are created, which makes it easier I guess, but since it's the first address that gets payed, it's kind of like the same situation, you can't really tell from incoming payments from which MN it belongs to.

So, I assume the way to track down each MN will be the same, as it utterly dependent on the vin, not the pubkey.

.
Click to expand...
You're right, start-many definitely simplifies things, but to determine which vin each payment is attributed to? Well, not simplified...
 
yidakee said:
hmmm ... I don't think so. That would be total chaos and be of disservice to the argument. The idea of start-many is to simplify things, not to make it worse. With typical start-many, 1k addresses (each with it's own vin) are created, which makes it easier I guess, but since it's the first address that gets payed, it's kind of like the same situation, you can't really tell from incoming payments from which MN it belongs to.

So, I assume the way to track down each MN will be the same, as it utterly dependent on the vin, not the pubkey.

.
Click to expand...

Actually, I just got thinking about it so I checked my wallet which I used start-many to run approx 18 MNs.
Payments (Mined fees) are coming in to many different addresses:

Edit: If you had multiple vins under only one public key, then that would be inconvenient - I suppose you'd go to Transactions list and right click each payment to get tx details; that would be a pain!

capture_001_07082015_031705.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah, is this new? I'm pretty sure start-many, when it first came out, payed to the first address in the mnastenode.conf... not sure. I'll be trying start-many today for the first time :grin:
 
Quick tech question on Liquidity Providers. Does DS get a boost having a set of wallets constantly ping-pong'ing tx back and forth, or is liquidityprovider=n enough?
 
*snif *snif... I was tRich ... now I'm tPoor :sad: ... time to rape the faucets.

Anyone wanting to play with DS/IX ... feel free: y4nASuBiRZWyCAJ3bKBUAR88UPQVRZdfpM
 
moli said:
I would love to do that, but scratchy's site doesn't let us use the same address for more than one genkey. it would give this message:
"ERROR: THERES ALREADY A NODE RUNNING WITH THIS ADDRESS"
Click to expand...

Thats per design of DASH, its not possible to use one address for multiple master nodes.
 
scratchy said:
Thats per design of DASH, its not possible to use one address for multiple master nodes.
Click to expand...
Didn't you read the posts one page back?

bertlebbert said:
If you issue "masternodelist full" command, search the result for tDash address = yDDoDLvKberiXXwS1hpX72yL7eD9aYT81Q, there are 2 remote MNs running on collateral from one address:
Code: 
C:\Testnet\out.23;32;07.txt (2 hits)
   Line 3:  "b37afec75251a73ff05ef71e4c5afd9fd37e95dc755177ba624cbfb229d65e89-1" : "  ENABLED 70101 yDDoDLvKberiXXwS1hpX72yL7eD9aYT81Q  188.165.84.230:21751 1438926942  -223 1438908084",
   Line 52:  "1b03acaebe349e07f52b232fb51a52c1a3389af1d6d600cad9830c57835c8afb-1" : "  ENABLED 70101 yDDoDLvKberiXXwS1hpX72yL7eD9aYT81Q  188.165.84.230:15180 1438927165  0 1438908060",
Click to expand...

It is possible to run multiple masternodes from one pubkey. E.g. this pubkey has 3x 1000 DASH in it

http://test.explorer.darkcoin.qa/address/yDDoDLvKberiXXwS1hpX72yL7eD9aYT81Q

And all vins are capable of running a masternode

b37afec75251a73ff05ef71e4c5afd9fd37e95dc755177ba624cbfb229d65e89-1
1b03acaebe349e07f52b232fb51a52c1a3389af1d6d600cad9830c57835c8afb-1
f2fe1440e0fe8f19712972d537479750f81e279dda044d0b6364b1899257c090-1

So if you start these with start-many you will see 3 masternodes with yDDoDLvKberiXXwS1hpX72yL7eD9aYT81Q being live.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top