1 2012-08-07 00:07:25 eoss has joined
2 2012-08-07 00:08:51 jurov has quit (away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3 2012-08-07 00:10:37 jurov has joined
4 2012-08-07 00:20:03 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
5 2012-08-07 00:20:52 rdponticelli has joined
6 2012-08-07 00:21:31 mb300sd has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
7 2012-08-07 00:27:24 ThomasV has joined
8 2012-08-07 00:29:03 toffoo has joined
9 2012-08-07 00:37:29 cantalwayswin has joined
10 2012-08-07 00:37:39 <cantalwayswin> hi all.
11 2012-08-07 00:37:56 <cantalwayswin> im new to bc and having a problem with bitcoin-qt under windows.
12 2012-08-07 00:38:07 <cantalwayswin> #bitcoin suggested i take my problems here
13 2012-08-07 00:38:43 B0g4r7__ has joined
14 2012-08-07 00:38:54 IveBeenBit has joined
15 2012-08-07 00:39:03 <phantomcircuit> <cantalwayswin> just installed bitcoin-qt. screwed it up, didnt set passphrase.
16 2012-08-07 00:39:04 <phantomcircuit> <cantalwayswin> now i cant seam to go back and set it.
17 2012-08-07 00:39:04 <phantomcircuit> <phantomcircuit> cantalwayswin, it's under settings iirc
18 2012-08-07 00:39:09 <phantomcircuit> <cantalwayswin> yah, but its grayed out.
19 2012-08-07 00:39:19 <cantalwayswin> yup.
20 2012-08-07 00:39:21 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, who did the crypto stuff?
21 2012-08-07 00:39:36 <BlueMatt> me, originally, but in -qt, wumpus
22 2012-08-07 00:39:44 sirk390 has joined
23 2012-08-07 00:39:46 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: can you be more specific?
24 2012-08-07 00:40:01 <BlueMatt> (and essentially its not anyone's anymore)
25 2012-08-07 00:40:06 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, who could best answer this question
26 2012-08-07 00:40:07 <phantomcircuit> :)
27 2012-08-07 00:40:18 <BlueMatt> anywhoo, cantalwayswin can you be more specific, do you have coins, otherwise try just deleting your wallet?
28 2012-08-07 00:40:32 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: <ahem> me, pre-originally ;-)
29 2012-08-07 00:40:40 <cantalwayswin> 1st time installed it asked for a passphrase and unser name and stuff. i figured i could just set all that later and wanted to start the blockchain sync.
30 2012-08-07 00:41:01 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
31 2012-08-07 00:41:02 B0g4r7__ is now known as B0g4r7
32 2012-08-07 00:41:06 <cantalwayswin> so an hourish later it was done, but i could not go back and set the passphrase.
33 2012-08-07 00:41:12 <cantalwayswin> the option is grayed out.
34 2012-08-07 00:41:22 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: well, yes
35 2012-08-07 00:41:35 <BlueMatt> and sipa did the footwork in wallet
36 2012-08-07 00:41:40 <cantalwayswin> no coins, just getting started. so i figured np, just reinstall.
37 2012-08-07 00:41:40 <BlueMatt> and, and and
38 2012-08-07 00:41:49 <BlueMatt> while we're at it lets just tag everyone in the channel
39 2012-08-07 00:42:16 <BlueMatt> cantalwayswin: wait..what? bitcoin-qt doesnt ask for passphrase, username, etc on first startup
40 2012-08-07 00:42:18 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, /names
41 2012-08-07 00:42:20 * phantomcircuit runs
42 2012-08-07 00:42:27 <gmaxwell> What BlueMatt said.
43 2012-08-07 00:42:29 <cantalwayswin> didnt work. right back to showing a wallet with 0 btc. didnt give me all the options as the first time.
44 2012-08-07 00:42:44 <BlueMatt> where did you download this client?
45 2012-08-07 00:42:47 <cantalwayswin> it did.
46 2012-08-07 00:42:58 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: pM
47 2012-08-07 00:42:58 <cantalwayswin> or i did something unknowingly.
48 2012-08-07 00:43:00 <jgarzik> I wrote crypter v1, which promptly catalyzed bluematt(iirc?) to rewrite it
49 2012-08-07 00:43:06 <cantalwayswin> sp
50 2012-08-07 00:43:30 <cantalwayswin> If not, they how do i get to where i need to be to set all that?
51 2012-08-07 00:43:44 <BlueMatt> jgarzik wrote crypter v1, I wrote v2, and then sipa wrote the footwork in wallet, then I wrote v4, then wumpus wrote -qt, with crypter, etc, etc, etc
52 2012-08-07 00:43:53 <cantalwayswin> settings>options is very limited.
53 2012-08-07 00:43:59 <BlueMatt> cantalwayswin: you said you were using bitcoin-qt, where did you download bitcoin-qt?
54 2012-08-07 00:44:06 <BlueMatt> and what version?
55 2012-08-07 00:44:08 <cantalwayswin> bitcoin.org
56 2012-08-07 00:44:10 <cantalwayswin> latest.
57 2012-08-07 00:44:14 sirk390 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
58 2012-08-07 00:44:22 Gladamas has joined
59 2012-08-07 00:45:09 <BlueMatt> you said the first time you started it, it asked you for user name/passphrase, etc?
60 2012-08-07 00:45:16 <cantalwayswin> im going to install on another pc right now and see if its any different.
61 2012-08-07 00:45:18 <cantalwayswin> yes.
62 2012-08-07 00:45:28 <BlueMatt> because no client ever released on bitcoin.org ever asked for information on first start afaik
63 2012-08-07 00:45:49 <BlueMatt> do you mean you went to bitcoin.org, clicked "Clients" and downloaded one of them?
64 2012-08-07 00:46:05 <BlueMatt> (ie multibit/armory/electrum)
65 2012-08-07 00:46:21 <cantalwayswin> yes.
66 2012-08-07 00:46:27 <BlueMatt> ahh
67 2012-08-07 00:46:44 <BlueMatt> ok, which one?
68 2012-08-07 00:46:46 <cantalwayswin> from the homepage, top right.
69 2012-08-07 00:46:50 <cantalwayswin> windows exe installer
70 2012-08-07 00:47:03 <BlueMatt> oh, not one of multibit/armory/electrum...darn
71 2012-08-07 00:47:31 <cantalwayswin> bitcoin-0.6.3-win32
72 2012-08-07 00:47:43 <BlueMatt> hmmm...
73 2012-08-07 00:47:53 <cantalwayswin> hay, ill try anything that moght work.
74 2012-08-07 00:48:09 <BlueMatt> Im just fuzzy on what happened
75 2012-08-07 00:48:28 <BlueMatt> did you, maybe, click settings->encrypt wallet right after you started and thus got the dialog?
76 2012-08-07 00:48:37 <meelu> i am letting my users deposit bitcoins into there accounts, is it ok to have a permenent deposit address for each account? whats the use for allowing them to generate new ones
77 2012-08-07 00:48:46 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
78 2012-08-07 00:48:54 <cantalwayswin> i got 10 5830s ready to start cranking.
79 2012-08-07 00:48:57 <cantalwayswin> nope.
80 2012-08-07 00:49:12 Cryo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
81 2012-08-07 00:49:24 <BlueMatt> cantalwayswin: can you provide a checksum on the downloaded file, for comparison?
82 2012-08-07 00:49:30 <cantalwayswin> jist started installer on clean pc. lets see if its different.
83 2012-08-07 00:49:57 <cantalwayswin> yah. let me find something to generate a md5 hash...
84 2012-08-07 00:51:11 <cantalwayswin> damn. i just installed on a clean pc and i get: error loading blkindex.dat
85 2012-08-07 00:52:00 <BlueMatt> did you have anything (on that pc) at $(AppData)/Bitcoin ?
86 2012-08-07 00:52:18 <BlueMatt> (ie C:\Users\$User\AppData\Roaming\Bitcoin on WinVist/7)
87 2012-08-07 00:53:01 <BlueMatt> if so (and you have no coins), delete the contents
88 2012-08-07 00:53:23 <cantalwayswin> i do now, but not b4 install.
89 2012-08-07 00:53:32 <cantalwayswin> nope, no coins. ok. delting it.
90 2012-08-07 00:54:28 <cantalwayswin> done. now it starts.
91 2012-08-07 00:54:43 <cantalwayswin> and looks same as other pc. so i guess im crazy?
92 2012-08-07 00:54:59 <BlueMatt> uhh...ok, Im lost, can you take a screenshot
93 2012-08-07 00:55:00 <cantalwayswin> option to change passphrase is still disabled.
94 2012-08-07 00:55:06 <cantalwayswin> sure.
95 2012-08-07 00:55:10 Gladamas has joined
96 2012-08-07 00:55:14 <BlueMatt> there is absolutely no reason that it would ask you to enter anything right away on first start
97 2012-08-07 00:55:21 <BlueMatt> it just shows up and shows you that you have no coins
98 2012-08-07 00:55:37 <cantalwayswin> oh no. sry if i confused you. on the clean pc, it did not.
99 2012-08-07 00:55:38 <BlueMatt> (the option to Encrypt Wallet will be enabled, which you would have to do before you change the passphrase)
100 2012-08-07 00:55:44 <BlueMatt> ok, that makes sense
101 2012-08-07 00:55:56 <BlueMatt> and the change passphrase option will always be disabled until the wallet is encrypted
102 2012-08-07 00:56:04 <BlueMatt> (there is otherwise no passphrase)
103 2012-08-07 00:56:05 <cantalwayswin> i have the mostly empty screen and its downloading the chain
104 2012-08-07 00:56:14 <cantalwayswin> ahh. ok.
105 2012-08-07 00:56:33 <cantalwayswin> so some how the 1st time around i was typin away and trigger something.
106 2012-08-07 00:56:43 <BlueMatt> must have
107 2012-08-07 00:58:27 <cantalwayswin> the first time around i tried to use gpuminer and it was saying incorrect id/pw.
108 2012-08-07 00:58:39 <cantalwayswin> I had it pointed to the localhost and pool was set at solo.
109 2012-08-07 00:59:13 Cryo has joined
110 2012-08-07 00:59:17 <cantalwayswin> I assume their is some place in bitcoin-qt that i have to specify id/pw for gpuminer to connect to it?
111 2012-08-07 00:59:30 <BlueMatt> to use a miner on a local node, you need to start the client with -rpcuser=???? -rpcpassword=???? -server
112 2012-08-07 00:59:37 <BlueMatt> or put those options in bitcoin.conf
113 2012-08-07 00:59:42 <BlueMatt> (in the same datadir as earlier)
114 2012-08-07 00:59:54 <BlueMatt> (without the - if you're in bitcoin.conf)
115 2012-08-07 01:00:05 <cantalwayswin> k. checkin that file....
116 2012-08-07 01:02:39 <cantalwayswin> im not seeing that file. search the whole drive. not in c:\users\jayz\appdata\roaming\bitcoin
117 2012-08-07 01:02:50 <BlueMatt> you have to create it the first time
118 2012-08-07 01:03:05 <cantalwayswin> but i do have a bunch of files
119 2012-08-07 01:03:08 <cantalwayswin> oh, ok.
120 2012-08-07 01:03:20 <BlueMatt> yea, thats (the only one?) thats no created automatically
121 2012-08-07 01:03:30 <cantalwayswin> any example files or wiki of options?
122 2012-08-07 01:03:52 <BlueMatt> just an empty file (notepad.exe is your friend, as always) that contains one option per line
123 2012-08-07 01:03:57 <cantalwayswin> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Running_Bitcoin
124 2012-08-07 01:04:03 <cantalwayswin> found that.
125 2012-08-07 01:04:10 <BlueMatt> or that
126 2012-08-07 01:05:00 <cantalwayswin> textpad is you friend too (as im to lazy to do things the hard way)
127 2012-08-07 01:05:37 IveBeenBit has left ()
128 2012-08-07 01:10:57 <cantalwayswin> im getting closer.
129 2012-08-07 01:11:25 <cantalwayswin> "problems communicating with bitcoin RPC" from gpuminer
130 2012-08-07 01:11:41 <cantalwayswin> im guessing because its still downloading the blockchain
131 2012-08-07 01:12:01 <BlueMatt> quite possible, yes
132 2012-08-07 01:12:15 <BlueMatt> I cant claim to know the exact error you would get, but that sounds reasonable
133 2012-08-07 01:12:24 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: are you trying to solo mine? O.o
134 2012-08-07 01:12:38 <cantalwayswin> while im waiting on that, and significant efficency differences between linux and windows?
135 2012-08-07 01:12:43 <cantalwayswin> yep, i am.
136 2012-08-07 01:13:07 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: like, for practical profit, or just some miniscule amount for fun? O.o
137 2012-08-07 01:13:07 <cantalwayswin> I have 10 dual core radeon 5830s and free power at my disposal.
138 2012-08-07 01:13:13 <luke-jr> cuz the first won't work with bitcoind :P
139 2012-08-07 01:13:34 <luke-jr> bitcoind can't handle the kind of load solo mining needs
140 2012-08-07 01:13:46 <cantalwayswin> oh.
141 2012-08-07 01:13:48 <cantalwayswin> damn.
142 2012-08-07 01:13:53 <BlueMatt> try going through p2pool
143 2012-08-07 01:13:58 <cantalwayswin> ok.
144 2012-08-07 01:13:59 <luke-jr> s/p2pool/Eloipool
145 2012-08-07 01:14:03 <cantalwayswin> looking that up...
146 2012-08-07 01:14:13 <BlueMatt> fd: luke runs eloipool
147 2012-08-07 01:14:13 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: it's a pool, not solo
148 2012-08-07 01:14:23 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: try this http://gitorious.org/bitcoin/eloipool
149 2012-08-07 01:14:27 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: he can run it too :p
150 2012-08-07 01:14:34 <roconnor> hey all, what's the status of Armory?
151 2012-08-07 01:14:36 <BlueMatt> or https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool
152 2012-08-07 01:14:41 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: that's a pool tho
153 2012-08-07 01:14:51 <luke-jr> he wants to solo
154 2012-08-07 01:14:57 <BlueMatt> oh, well, yea you could solo through a pool server
155 2012-08-07 01:15:01 <BlueMatt> thats fair
156 2012-08-07 01:15:35 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
157 2012-08-07 01:15:36 <cantalwayswin> i want to see what these cards can crank out and yes this is for fun at the moment.
158 2012-08-07 01:16:05 t7 has quit ()
159 2012-08-07 01:16:10 <cantalwayswin> but if i get good results, might as well let it make me some cash.
160 2012-08-07 01:17:23 <cantalwayswin> so if i want to keep all my work for myself but not have my gpus waiting around for blocks, p2p pool is the way to go?
161 2012-08-07 01:18:20 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: huh?
162 2012-08-07 01:18:33 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: p2pool is just another pool; if you want a pool, join #Eligius :P
163 2012-08-07 01:18:50 B0g4r7__ has joined
164 2012-08-07 01:18:56 <cantalwayswin> maybe i did not understand...
165 2012-08-07 01:19:04 <cantalwayswin> <luke-jr> bitcoind can't handle the kind of load solo mining needs
166 2012-08-07 01:19:23 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
167 2012-08-07 01:19:23 B0g4r7__ is now known as B0g4r7
168 2012-08-07 01:20:15 <BlueMatt> bitcoind will fall over under too much load, luke's suggestion was to essentially run your own pool locally for yourself
169 2012-08-07 01:20:20 <BlueMatt> which could handle the load better
170 2012-08-07 01:20:54 <cantalwayswin> ahh. ok. got ya.
171 2012-08-07 01:21:18 <cantalwayswin> what software should i be looking for?
172 2012-08-07 01:22:13 <jaxtr> cointality
173 2012-08-07 01:22:36 <jaxtr> oops
174 2012-08-07 01:23:03 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: try this http://gitorious.org/bitcoin/eloipool
175 2012-08-07 01:23:20 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: takes minimal configuration if you just want to solo (ie, not save shares in a db)
176 2012-08-07 01:25:17 <cantalwayswin> appears to be linux app
177 2012-08-07 01:25:56 phonebook_ has joined
178 2012-08-07 01:26:00 <cantalwayswin> python. i guess any python interpriter will work?
179 2012-08-07 01:26:15 Guest47570 has joined
180 2012-08-07 01:26:19 <luke-jr> you'd need to port it to Mac/Windows
181 2012-08-07 01:26:25 <luke-jr> shouldn't be too hard - just replace epoll
182 2012-08-07 01:26:50 Guest47570 is now known as imsaguy
183 2012-08-07 01:26:52 imsaguy has quit (Changing host)
184 2012-08-07 01:26:52 imsaguy has joined
185 2012-08-07 01:27:05 <BlueMatt> or...just set it all up to point to a central bitcoind for now, then actually do something about the load once its all working ;)
186 2012-08-07 01:27:08 <cantalwayswin> more fun than watching the chain sync.
187 2012-08-07 01:27:16 [\\\] has quit ()
188 2012-08-07 01:27:17 <BlueMatt> well, ok...
189 2012-08-07 01:27:56 <luke-jr> lol
190 2012-08-07 01:28:02 <cantalwayswin> prolly faster to load up nix on a box than make this run in windows.
191 2012-08-07 01:28:24 <luke-jr> no doubt
192 2012-08-07 01:28:41 <BlueMatt> probably, though I would think a vm for just the pool would work just as well
193 2012-08-07 01:28:55 <cantalwayswin> any packages for this thing? yum, rpm, etc?
194 2012-08-07 01:29:22 <cantalwayswin> i dont care what distro i use. no gentoo tho. dont feel like watching things compile all night.
195 2012-08-07 01:29:29 <cantalwayswin> eh, i got enough spare hw.
196 2012-08-07 01:29:52 <cantalwayswin> no reason i cant mine on the same machine running the pool right?
197 2012-08-07 01:30:21 <BlueMatt> not really
198 2012-08-07 01:30:25 akldls has joined
199 2012-08-07 01:31:04 <cantalwayswin> 5 boxes, each has dual pci-e, gig nic, the basics. should not get overloaded i dont think.
200 2012-08-07 01:32:11 <luke-jr> cantalwayswin: no, not even versions :P
201 2012-08-07 01:32:42 <cantalwayswin> i dont understand.
202 2012-08-07 01:32:45 <luke-jr> I don't maintain it as a software product, I maintain it as the backend for my pool (Eligius)
203 2012-08-07 01:32:54 <cantalwayswin> ohh.
204 2012-08-07 01:32:56 <cantalwayswin> got ya.
205 2012-08-07 01:32:59 <luke-jr> the code is free software to be nice :P
206 2012-08-07 01:33:00 <cantalwayswin> meaning no packages.
207 2012-08-07 01:33:14 <luke-jr> right
208 2012-08-07 01:33:32 <cantalwayswin> well in that case maybe i should contribute to your pool.
209 2012-08-07 01:33:37 <cantalwayswin> ;)
210 2012-08-07 01:34:02 <cantalwayswin> its not listed in gpuminer.
211 2012-08-07 01:34:36 <cantalwayswin> i joined your channel.
212 2012-08-07 01:35:18 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
213 2012-08-07 01:40:39 tower has joined
214 2012-08-07 01:42:33 <luke-jr> haha, I didn't even notice that was you until I went back to this tab XD
215 2012-08-07 01:48:19 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
216 2012-08-07 01:48:38 da2ce749 has joined
217 2012-08-07 01:49:17 da2ce749 is now known as da2ce787
218 2012-08-07 01:57:14 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
219 2012-08-07 02:00:41 cantalwayswin has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
220 2012-08-07 02:01:17 Joric has quit ()
221 2012-08-07 02:03:00 Gladamas_ has joined
222 2012-08-07 02:05:15 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
223 2012-08-07 02:06:28 dvide has quit ()
224 2012-08-07 02:09:14 leotreasure has joined
225 2012-08-07 02:09:36 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
226 2012-08-07 02:09:44 leotreasure has left ()
227 2012-08-07 02:09:44 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
228 2012-08-07 02:10:26 slush has joined
229 2012-08-07 02:11:38 slush1 has joined
230 2012-08-07 02:11:43 meelu has joined
231 2012-08-07 02:21:21 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
232 2012-08-07 02:23:35 minimoose has joined
233 2012-08-07 02:28:21 phonebook_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
234 2012-08-07 02:35:29 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
235 2012-08-07 02:36:46 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
236 2012-08-07 02:36:56 nickrb- has joined
237 2012-08-07 02:40:59 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
238 2012-08-07 02:44:16 phonebook_ has joined
239 2012-08-07 02:45:38 BlueMattBot has joined
240 2012-08-07 02:47:16 BlueMattBot has quit (Client Quit)
241 2012-08-07 02:47:40 Gladamas has joined
242 2012-08-07 02:47:58 BlueMattBot has joined
243 2012-08-07 02:49:00 Gladamas has quit (Client Quit)
244 2012-08-07 02:54:14 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
245 2012-08-07 02:54:21 [7] has joined
246 2012-08-07 02:55:22 Ferroh has joined
247 2012-08-07 02:57:18 nickrb has joined
248 2012-08-07 02:57:52 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
249 2012-08-07 03:01:35 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
250 2012-08-07 03:21:25 egecko has joined
251 2012-08-07 03:23:13 <amiller> hrm, i wonder if there's even a need to choose a difficulty
252 2012-08-07 03:23:23 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
253 2012-08-07 03:23:31 localhost has joined
254 2012-08-07 03:23:41 Applejackk has joined
255 2012-08-07 03:23:44 <amiller> what happens if you just put whatever threshold you want, so it's H( blockheader || nonce || threshold )
256 2012-08-07 03:24:25 <amiller> but you're free to pick your own threshold just as you pick your own nonce
257 2012-08-07 03:25:11 <amiller> and then chain length would be determined by that threhsold
258 2012-08-07 03:25:13 <amiller> i don't think this works
259 2012-08-07 03:25:25 <amiller> but i'm not sure why not
260 2012-08-07 03:25:49 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
261 2012-08-07 03:27:08 <amiller> yeah nvm it's better if difficulty can only ramp up gradually
262 2012-08-07 03:28:09 Maccer has quit (Excess Flood)
263 2012-08-07 03:28:39 Applejackk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
264 2012-08-07 03:28:41 mb300sd has joined
265 2012-08-07 03:30:19 mb300sd has quit (Client Quit)
266 2012-08-07 03:30:30 mb300sd has joined
267 2012-08-07 03:34:52 RainbowDashh has joined
268 2012-08-07 03:35:18 <amiller> okay so that work snatching thing, i think it's probably necessary that we actually validate deadweight-forks that we acknowledge in our chain
269 2012-08-07 03:35:35 <amiller> that way we get a perfect count of the work done on all the forks
270 2012-08-07 03:35:56 <amiller> it will still be easy to reject forks that have inadequate work
271 2012-08-07 03:36:03 <amiller> (using the skip list branch and bound thing)
272 2012-08-07 03:36:31 <amiller> in the case that there's actually a perfect partition and one of those long race condition things, it means that we'll acknowledge it as it seems to happen
273 2012-08-07 03:42:27 Gladamas_ has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 90 seconds.)
274 2012-08-07 03:42:53 Gladamas has joined
275 2012-08-07 03:44:13 <meelu> ignore my optimisation, " echo 'Please Deposit to'; $address = ($bitcoin->getaddressesbyaccount('meelu')); print $address[0];
276 2012-08-07 03:44:13 <meelu> " why no work?
277 2012-08-07 03:44:21 <meelu> :D
278 2012-08-07 03:44:35 <meelu> not trolling might be very stupid there i lost my php mojo
279 2012-08-07 03:46:35 RainbowDashh has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
280 2012-08-07 03:46:58 <luke-jr> slush1: you deleted your bitcoind clone?
281 2012-08-07 03:47:28 theymos has joined
282 2012-08-07 03:47:37 wereHamster has joined
283 2012-08-07 03:47:50 <theymos> BBE testnet is on the current testnet now.
284 2012-08-07 03:49:16 <meelu> no worries getaccountaddress used im not planning on letting users have multiple deposit addresses yet
285 2012-08-07 03:49:50 knotwork has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
286 2012-08-07 03:52:22 Maccer has joined
287 2012-08-07 03:54:31 RainbowDashh has joined
288 2012-08-07 03:54:56 <amiller> if we store valid forks as an overlay in our chain, then we can zip along valid transactions as we go!
289 2012-08-07 03:55:00 <amiller> that's totally the way to do it, isn't it?
290 2012-08-07 03:55:06 <amiller> that way transactions that don't cross are still valid
291 2012-08-07 03:55:15 <amiller> no fees are awarded
292 2012-08-07 03:55:24 <amiller> hrm
293 2012-08-07 03:56:09 <amiller> maybe awarding fees isn't even a problem, but definitely no mining bonus
294 2012-08-07 03:56:31 <amiller> of course there will be no mining bonus anyway
295 2012-08-07 03:56:35 <amiller> eventually
296 2012-08-07 04:00:20 <amiller> you could totally have two block chains, each with a different logical order of blocks, but each with enough merkle tree roots that it's trivial to check _all consistent views_ of the transaction graph at once.
297 2012-08-07 04:00:43 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
298 2012-08-07 04:01:36 <amiller> we should eat forks.
299 2012-08-07 04:01:39 <amiller> transactions and all.
300 2012-08-07 04:02:04 <amiller> we don't apply transactions from their merkle tree if it conflicts with our merkle tree.
301 2012-08-07 04:02:38 guruvan_ has joined
302 2012-08-07 04:03:09 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
303 2012-08-07 04:03:29 <amiller> the difficulty rules must still be set so that we're eventually going to converge and settle on one or the other
304 2012-08-07 04:04:03 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
305 2012-08-07 04:04:07 <amiller> if you start taking on too much fork-weight, the difficulty automatically and normatively increases
306 2012-08-07 04:04:13 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
307 2012-08-07 04:04:23 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
308 2012-08-07 04:06:47 RainbowDashh has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
309 2012-08-07 04:07:46 <amiller> actually if anything fees should be used as extra leverage
310 2012-08-07 04:08:32 <amiller> transactions that don't go through.
311 2012-08-07 04:08:34 <amiller> yeah!
312 2012-08-07 04:08:36 <amiller> check this out
313 2012-08-07 04:09:05 <amiller> if some miner makes an orphaned block
314 2012-08-07 04:09:26 <amiller> and we eat it, and their transactions go through, the miner gets to keep the fees for all those transactions
315 2012-08-07 04:10:16 <amiller> but transactions that could not be zipped into the main chain get reawarded to whoever included this fork in a mainchain block
316 2012-08-07 04:10:42 <amiller> if you get a long fork into the blockchain, you get to eat all the fees
317 2012-08-07 04:11:05 MC-Eeepc has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
318 2012-08-07 04:11:26 <amiller> that incentivizes miners to hire smugglers to go find forks from the outer rim.
319 2012-08-07 04:13:25 <amiller> the longer the fork gets, the more conflicting transactions will be there
320 2012-08-07 04:13:31 <amiller> the bigger the jackpot will be for the miner to get them in there
321 2012-08-07 04:17:17 Keefe has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
322 2012-08-07 04:18:11 <amiller> heheheh.
323 2012-08-07 04:18:36 Keefe has joined
324 2012-08-07 04:22:09 AlexWaters1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
325 2012-08-07 04:22:25 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
326 2012-08-07 04:23:25 devrandom has joined
327 2012-08-07 04:30:43 Diablo-D3 has joined
328 2012-08-07 04:31:34 <amiller> wow okay so.
329 2012-08-07 04:31:45 <amiller> you know how i have been talking about this balance between dead forks and difficulty
330 2012-08-07 04:31:51 <amiller> and resilience
331 2012-08-07 04:32:03 <amiller> like it's safe as long as you take on no more than 1/2 dead weihgt.
332 2012-08-07 04:32:04 <amiller> well.
333 2012-08-07 04:32:09 <amiller> this is also the answer to our fees problem.
334 2012-08-07 04:32:13 <amiller> users want us to run fast.
335 2012-08-07 04:32:23 <amiller> if we ran at 1/2 speed, you would get the most safety in the shortest time.
336 2012-08-07 04:32:46 <meelu> anyone use openssl to setup ssl certificate on there site?
337 2012-08-07 04:32:53 <amiller> just assume that we are charging fees like 'rent'
338 2012-08-07 04:33:02 <amiller> meaning you have to plunk down some bitcoins in escrow for your data in the merkle tree
339 2012-08-07 04:33:05 <amiller> it's like a storage locker
340 2012-08-07 04:33:24 <amiller> basically if you run fsater
341 2012-08-07 04:33:28 <amiller> you start reclaiming storage faster too
342 2012-08-07 04:33:49 <amiller> if you reclaim storage faster, people will like the service less and will pay less for fees
343 2012-08-07 04:33:53 <amiller> so miners will have to slow down too
344 2012-08-07 04:34:05 <amiller> that will start stretching out the blocks
345 2012-08-07 04:34:24 <amiller> so!
346 2012-08-07 04:34:30 <amiller> you either pay miners more fees
347 2012-08-07 04:34:35 <amiller> or you lose it in rent anyway
348 2012-08-07 04:35:26 MiningBuddy has joined
349 2012-08-07 04:35:45 <amiller> so there's a four way balance between mining power and network/storage, and between money used for storage and money used as currency
350 2012-08-07 04:36:39 <amiller> that is, money applied to transactions and money applied to storage
351 2012-08-07 04:38:12 agricocb has joined
352 2012-08-07 04:38:22 <weex> meelu do you have an RPC_CONNECTION_STRING set somewhere? web server logs show any errors?
353 2012-08-07 04:38:40 <meelu> weex, where did that come from
354 2012-08-07 04:38:45 MiningBuddy- has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
355 2012-08-07 04:38:56 <amiller> i realized that the ideal model for thinking about bitcoin theoretically
356 2012-08-07 04:39:04 <amiller> is when you just assume that lookup-by-hash is one unit
357 2012-08-07 04:39:10 <weex> meelu: i assume you're using jsonRPCclient.php?
358 2012-08-07 04:39:16 <meelu> weex, yeah i am
359 2012-08-07 04:39:21 <meelu> why? howd u know
360 2012-08-07 04:39:27 <amiller> you can efficiently preimage a hash, as long as someone forward-imaged it first
361 2012-08-07 04:39:28 <weex> just was looking at some code like that
362 2012-08-07 04:39:36 <weex> and the connection string/info was missing
363 2012-08-07 04:39:43 <weex> so that might be your case as well
364 2012-08-07 04:40:17 <amiller> mining is the cost of a hash going forwards, the costs of transaction verification are basically hashes going backwards
365 2012-08-07 04:40:35 <amiller> hashes are like causality diodes
366 2012-08-07 04:40:37 <meelu> at the momoent everythings fine, thanks though
367 2012-08-07 04:40:46 <meelu> waiting for confirmations of a small transaction test i did
368 2012-08-07 04:42:21 Bwild has joined
369 2012-08-07 04:42:54 RainbowDashh has joined
370 2012-08-07 04:44:55 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #4: STILL FAILING in 1 hr 19 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/4/
371 2012-08-07 04:49:18 <amiller> so yeah the thing to do is just to commit to your own difficulty
372 2012-08-07 04:49:22 <amiller> the harder you commit to
373 2012-08-07 04:49:24 <amiller> the more fees you get
374 2012-08-07 04:49:40 <amiller> you're swallowing up old data!
375 2012-08-07 04:49:44 <amiller> like the langoliers from the steven king novel
376 2012-08-07 04:51:00 <amiller> bah
377 2012-08-07 04:51:45 <amiller> i think it works
378 2012-08-07 04:54:12 <amiller> if we didn't set a minimum difficulty but instead tried to just leave it as a competition, i'm trying to figure out what can be tweaked so that there's not much storage used
379 2012-08-07 04:55:24 <amiller> we definitely want to eat other chain's work, but what we really want to do is eat the heads off
380 2012-08-07 04:55:42 <amiller> not even have to validate the work that's below ours
381 2012-08-07 04:56:22 elkingrey has quit (Quit: Leaving)
382 2012-08-07 04:56:23 <amiller> ahhh. so that's exactly what we do
383 2012-08-07 04:56:57 <amiller> YEAH
384 2012-08-07 04:57:02 <amiller> in each transaction!
385 2012-08-07 04:57:17 <amiller> you include with your fee an indication of the minimum difficulty block your transaction may be included in!
386 2012-08-07 04:57:33 <amiller> if you pay a fee to be included at a lower difficulty fine! but you risk getting interleaved
387 2012-08-07 04:57:43 <amiller> you can trace transactions back to see what their difficulty history has been
388 2012-08-07 04:58:14 <amiller> if you accept a coin from someone who had some really low difficulties in their recent history
389 2012-08-07 04:58:19 <amiller> then they're vulnerable to being preempted
390 2012-08-07 05:01:02 <amiller> rare hashes!
391 2012-08-07 05:01:07 <amiller> they take a long time to find
392 2012-08-07 05:01:12 <amiller> but when you find one, they propagate quickly
393 2012-08-07 05:01:28 <amiller> everyone can compute easy hashes but no one wants to shovel them around
394 2012-08-07 05:01:41 <amiller> that is where we strike a balance
395 2012-08-07 05:02:17 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
396 2012-08-07 05:02:34 <amiller> everyone agrees that the ideal behavior of bitcoin is that it should automatically stabilize regardless of what the conditions are
397 2012-08-07 05:02:37 <amiller> right
398 2012-08-07 05:03:01 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
399 2012-08-07 05:04:55 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
400 2012-08-07 05:05:05 <amiller> does anyone want to guess what units fees are measured in?
401 2012-08-07 05:05:29 <weex> amiller: btc?
402 2012-08-07 05:05:30 <amiller> difficulty per byte!
403 2012-08-07 05:05:35 <amiller> er, work per byte!
404 2012-08-07 05:06:02 <amiller> if you want to store 1024 bytes, you don't say for how 'long' you want to store it, you say for how 'hard' you want to store it
405 2012-08-07 05:06:13 <amiller> the more work that gets done, the faster your lease is up
406 2012-08-07 05:06:52 <amiller> and when a miner does work, he consumes from those storage fees
407 2012-08-07 05:07:48 <amiller> we can fucking set everything without parametesr
408 2012-08-07 05:09:48 <weex> amiller: so data expires?
409 2012-08-07 05:09:52 <amiller> yup
410 2012-08-07 05:10:03 <amiller> you plunk down bitcoin for how long you want your transaction to stick around
411 2012-08-07 05:10:15 <amiller> you can extend your lease by buying more bitcoin and filling it up again
412 2012-08-07 05:10:20 <amiller> it's like a parking meter
413 2012-08-07 05:10:22 <weex> like rent on the memorypool?
414 2012-08-07 05:10:32 <amiller> pretty much
415 2012-08-07 05:11:50 <amiller> and length isn't measured in time, but in chain-work
416 2012-08-07 05:11:52 RainbowDashh has joined
417 2012-08-07 05:11:54 <weex> what does the variable difficulty buy you? I'm imagining a ton of versions of the same blockchain would start to exist
418 2012-08-07 05:12:12 <amiller> they get cherry picked and merged
419 2012-08-07 05:12:19 leotreasure has joined
420 2012-08-07 05:12:43 <amiller> you're allowed to 'place down' a bunch of old-forkedblocks on your current block, except only the ones at or above your difficulty
421 2012-08-07 05:12:51 toffoo has quit ()
422 2012-08-07 05:12:51 <amiller> ones below that difficulty are simply not necessarily validated
423 2012-08-07 05:13:05 <amiller> the lower difficulty ones can be replayed out of order
424 2012-08-07 05:13:35 <amiller> you can't get double spent if you refuse coins from someone that have had a low-difficulty past
425 2012-08-07 05:14:38 <amiller> if you accept a 'low-work' coin, and if there's a really large fork, and you're on the losing fork, then someone else might just skip over the block your transaction was in
426 2012-08-07 05:15:06 <amiller> it's absolutely bitcoin
427 2012-08-07 05:15:08 <amiller> but the 'bit' is a pun
428 2012-08-07 05:15:18 <amiller> it refers to both a digit of rarity in a hash
429 2012-08-07 05:15:21 <amiller> and a unit of storage
430 2012-08-07 05:15:38 <amiller> it's really bit^2coin
431 2012-08-07 05:15:53 <amiller> it's worth one bit of storage for the duration of one bit of work
432 2012-08-07 05:16:58 jgarzik has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
433 2012-08-07 05:17:27 jgarzik has joined
434 2012-08-07 05:17:38 <amiller> i think i've just figured out the last secret of bitcoin
435 2012-08-07 05:17:50 jgarzik is now known as Guest28068
436 2012-08-07 05:19:36 akldls has quit (Quit: Page closed)
437 2012-08-07 05:20:34 <amiller> it doesn't take much storage to hoard a lot of coins
438 2012-08-07 05:20:37 <amiller> so it's still perfectly usable as a currency
439 2012-08-07 05:20:55 <amiller> but slowly it will atrophy.
440 2012-08-07 05:21:01 <amiller> it has to, in order to be self stabilizing.
441 2012-08-07 05:23:30 <meelu> I want to let users download blk0001.dat mirror from my server like updated daily, Anyone give me tips?
442 2012-08-07 05:24:06 <weex> sd 1
443 2012-08-07 05:24:47 <meelu> would people find it usefull
444 2012-08-07 05:25:11 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
445 2012-08-07 05:25:15 <weex> meelu: i'm not sure, the client does a pretty good job at this point and there are others who already do it
446 2012-08-07 05:25:27 <weex> it's not good for the network as a whole that people do that
447 2012-08-07 05:25:47 <meelu> i will let them do checksums or whatnot
448 2012-08-07 05:27:55 <weex> via ssl as well? its up to you, in general it opens up more ways for incorrect data and transactions to be broadcast
449 2012-08-07 05:30:37 Gladamas_ has joined
450 2012-08-07 05:35:10 <amiller> miners have to pay for storage too
451 2012-08-07 05:35:18 <amiller> when you mine, you need to have stake in the game
452 2012-08-07 05:35:35 <amiller> when you mine you need to pay for your block header
453 2012-08-07 05:35:43 <amiller> if you mine with an empty block
454 2012-08-07 05:35:52 <amiller> and your fork gets merged into the main chain
455 2012-08-07 05:35:54 <amiller> then you lost money!
456 2012-08-07 05:36:49 <amiller> when you mine you know exactly how many fees are going to get if yours is the fork, but you also know how much you're going to lose if you produce a valid hash, tell someone about it, and it gets eaten by the main fork
457 2012-08-07 05:36:50 <luke-jr> meelu: blk0001 doesn't change anymore, and there's a torrent up
458 2012-08-07 05:36:52 <amiller> lololol!
459 2012-08-07 05:37:54 <amiller> so it's actually expensive to build your own fork
460 2012-08-07 05:37:57 <meelu> where is the torrent dude
461 2012-08-07 05:38:01 <meelu> luke-jr,
462 2012-08-07 05:39:06 <luke-jr> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94881.0
463 2012-08-07 05:46:00 <amiller> even my proof of work makes sense again!
464 2012-08-07 05:46:01 <amiller> roflmao
465 2012-08-07 05:46:04 <amiller> it's not about gpus, duh
466 2012-08-07 05:46:09 <amiller> it's about access to this network of hash inversions
467 2012-08-07 05:46:21 <amiller> from the head node, you can walk backwards and hit every single piece of data
468 2012-08-07 05:46:26 <amiller> eventually we're going to forget that data
469 2012-08-07 05:46:34 <amiller> mining strength is a measure of how far back you can go
470 2012-08-07 05:47:21 <amiller> proof of work: start at the head of your block, walk backwards through the graph taking random choices at each step
471 2012-08-07 05:47:57 <amiller> the further back you go, the better chance you have of winning at some difficulty
472 2012-08-07 05:51:17 Gladamas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
473 2012-08-07 05:51:24 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
474 2012-08-07 05:53:00 <amiller> if you only want to go back one step, then you have to get like 0000000023jsljslfkj with your hash
475 2012-08-07 05:53:11 <amiller> but if you go back all the way forever, you probably just need to sort of break even
476 2012-08-07 06:01:17 <amiller> in other words, what we're doing now is the way of proving work without any hash-graph network
477 2012-08-07 06:01:42 <amiller> that's what you have to do if you can't even remember what you had for breakfast
478 2012-08-07 06:01:49 <amiller> keep rehashing the same data over and over again
479 2012-08-07 06:05:36 <amiller> so the proof of work proceeds in steps, at each step you have some chance of winning, determined by your difficulty
480 2012-08-07 06:05:48 <amiller> if you don't win, it gives you a pointer to your next chance
481 2012-08-07 06:06:13 <amiller> each subsequent step you have a better chance of winning
482 2012-08-07 06:06:19 <amiller> or if it's too far back for you you can just start over if you want
483 2012-08-07 06:08:20 wereHamster has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
484 2012-08-07 06:09:27 roconnor_ has joined
485 2012-08-07 06:09:43 wereHamster has joined
486 2012-08-07 06:09:54 roconnor has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
487 2012-08-07 06:12:51 <amiller> hrm i can't decide if that part makes sense if it applies to arbitrary history or just to the transaction merkle root
488 2012-08-07 06:12:56 <amiller> i think it should only apply to the transaction space
489 2012-08-07 06:13:02 <amiller> because that's what gets easier up or down
490 2012-08-07 06:13:24 <amiller> if you forget blockchain history it's probably fine
491 2012-08-07 06:14:37 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
492 2012-08-07 06:22:33 ovidiusoft has joined
493 2012-08-07 06:26:47 <amiller> yeah you definitely don't need to do proof of work over the blockchain history
494 2012-08-07 06:27:12 <amiller> but over the current-state graph, yeah
495 2012-08-07 06:29:09 <amiller> since that determines how hard the work is
496 2012-08-07 06:30:09 <amiller> and that's what increases/decreases according to how much money is getting paid to miners
497 2012-08-07 06:31:04 <Gladamas> are you talking to yourself?
498 2012-08-07 06:31:24 <amiller> aren't you?
499 2012-08-07 06:32:49 ivan\ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
500 2012-08-07 06:35:46 Marf has joined
501 2012-08-07 06:36:07 <amiller> YEAH
502 2012-08-07 06:36:10 <amiller> i got it!
503 2012-08-07 06:36:16 <amiller> the proof of work trees i've been describing
504 2012-08-07 06:36:22 <amiller> they're scale invariant so you can set your difficulty according to those
505 2012-08-07 06:36:22 ivan\ has joined
506 2012-08-07 06:36:44 <amiller> and that has the quality that the most interesting hashes are the ones you're most likely going to have to fold into novel hashes
507 2012-08-07 06:36:52 <amiller> they're also the ones that you need to validate novel hashes
508 2012-08-07 06:36:55 <amiller> so they propagate the most
509 2012-08-07 06:38:35 <amiller> if you stretched out all the work every done for bitcoin on a timeline, imagine a timeline with every single hash anyone ever attempted
510 2012-08-07 06:38:42 <amiller> the most interesting hash we ever found
511 2012-08-07 06:38:49 <amiller> is uniformly selected in there
512 2012-08-07 06:38:56 <amiller> and it partitions our entire timeline into two pieces
513 2012-08-07 06:39:02 <amiller> before the great block and after the great block
514 2012-08-07 06:39:16 lukas has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
515 2012-08-07 06:41:23 <amiller> you can probably forget about the history that's behind the largest block we've ever seen
516 2012-08-07 06:41:56 <amiller> if you'd rather move on rather than grow
517 2012-08-07 06:42:12 <amiller> that provides a uniform mechanism for forgetting history if we want to
518 2012-08-07 06:43:09 <amiller> and for splitting off from someone's chain if it's decided to
519 2012-08-07 06:44:22 RainbowDashh has joined
520 2012-08-07 06:47:23 <lianj> can i has code
521 2012-08-07 06:48:19 nickrb- has joined
522 2012-08-07 06:49:55 <amiller> this will be easy to implement a demonstration of
523 2012-08-07 06:50:28 <amiller> and because it's scale invariant, it will look just as cool when i do it myself with a tiny computer
524 2012-08-07 06:50:38 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
525 2012-08-07 06:50:44 <amiller> it's like a high-way of awesome-looking hashes
526 2012-08-07 06:51:17 [Tycho] has joined
527 2012-08-07 06:51:35 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
528 2012-08-07 06:52:31 nickrb has joined
529 2012-08-07 06:53:15 lukas has joined
530 2012-08-07 06:53:21 <lianj> you wrote so much, i have no context, sorry
531 2012-08-07 06:53:52 <amiller> yeah it all follows from one new data structure
532 2012-08-07 06:53:54 <amiller> it's a skip list of work
533 2012-08-07 06:54:33 <lianj> what is it you are writing? described in one sentence?
534 2012-08-07 06:55:13 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
535 2012-08-07 06:55:16 sirk390 has joined
536 2012-08-07 06:55:59 <amiller> it's a scalable and efficient way of merging the two tasks in bitcoin - work, and propagation of work
537 2012-08-07 06:56:04 <amiller> http://igoro.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/skiplist.png
538 2012-08-07 06:56:17 <amiller> everyone should be able to understand what a skip list
539 2012-08-07 06:56:42 <amiller> it's a data structure where for every row, the number of nodes are probabilistically smapled
540 2012-08-07 06:56:47 <amiller> each row has approximately half of the rows between them
541 2012-08-07 06:56:52 <amiller> we can build a skip list out of our work
542 2012-08-07 06:57:00 <amiller> each row corresponds to a zero in a hash
543 2012-08-07 06:57:25 <lianj> work as in mining?
544 2012-08-07 06:57:29 <amiller> yes
545 2012-08-07 06:57:51 <amiller> suppose the current block has 10 zeros
546 2012-08-07 06:58:13 <amiller> with a skip list, you can travel next to the most recent block with 11 zeros
547 2012-08-07 06:58:19 <amiller> and from there to the most recent block with 12 zeros
548 2012-08-07 06:58:49 <amiller> most especially, you can easily skip to the largest hash that you ever saw
549 2012-08-07 06:58:55 <lianj> recent block in the mainnet?
550 2012-08-07 06:58:57 <amiller> right
551 2012-08-07 06:59:24 meelu has joined
552 2012-08-07 06:59:33 <amiller> what i'm proposing is very simple
553 2012-08-07 06:59:37 <lianj> why is it interesting what the smallest hast was?
554 2012-08-07 06:59:40 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
555 2012-08-07 06:59:42 <lianj> *hash
556 2012-08-07 07:00:02 <amiller> for each block, in addition to storing a hash of the previous block, you should also store the most recent block that's higher than that one
557 2012-08-07 07:00:30 <amiller> it's that simple
558 2012-08-07 07:00:40 <amiller> you can now navigate to your BC/AD point
559 2012-08-07 07:00:45 meelu has quit (Changing host)
560 2012-08-07 07:00:45 meelu has joined
561 2012-08-07 07:00:49 <lianj> what for?
562 2012-08-07 07:00:50 <amiller> the single most important event you can remember that partitions time
563 2012-08-07 07:01:04 <meelu> .message NickServ IDENTIFY fuckbitcoin
564 2012-08-07 07:01:06 <amiller> there are so many essential things you can do with this
565 2012-08-07 07:01:07 <meelu> joking
566 2012-08-07 07:01:08 <meelu> :D
567 2012-08-07 07:01:12 <amiller> the first is that you can use it to estimate the total amount of work in a chain
568 2012-08-07 07:01:19 <amiller> suppose you are a new client and you haven't downloaded any chains
569 2012-08-07 07:01:23 <amiller> how do you know what's the largest head
570 2012-08-07 07:01:25 <amiller> iterate?
571 2012-08-07 07:01:27 <amiller> hell now!
572 2012-08-07 07:01:27 <meelu> sorry wrong chan to joke
573 2012-08-07 07:01:34 <amiller> from any head
574 2012-08-07 07:01:40 <amiller> you can travel back up to the largest block ever found
575 2012-08-07 07:01:45 <amiller> and also back down to the genesis block
576 2012-08-07 07:01:45 <meelu> who u speaking to man
577 2012-08-07 07:01:48 <amiller> lianj
578 2012-08-07 07:01:53 <amiller> who are you speaking to
579 2012-08-07 07:01:54 <meelu> oh
580 2012-08-07 07:02:03 <amiller> before that i was talking to myself
581 2012-08-07 07:02:12 <lianj> amiller: you
582 2012-08-07 07:02:16 <meelu> i was making a joke about trying to identify myself
583 2012-08-07 07:02:22 <amiller> oh
584 2012-08-07 07:02:22 <meelu> in the wrong chan
585 2012-08-07 07:02:31 <meelu> and tried to catch up with your text
586 2012-08-07 07:02:48 <amiller> just pick the most interesting thing i said and bisect your way back from there
587 2012-08-07 07:03:00 <lianj> by largest you mean just the highest block?
588 2012-08-07 07:03:01 <meelu> well largest head
589 2012-08-07 07:03:05 <amiller> yeah
590 2012-08-07 07:03:07 <amiller> most number of zeros
591 2012-08-07 07:03:18 <meelu> i need to go a bit more back llol
592 2012-08-07 07:03:25 <lianj> it doesnt have to have the most zeros
593 2012-08-07 07:03:32 <amiller> no no no i mean
594 2012-08-07 07:03:40 <amiller> so you can skip back to the block with the most zeros
595 2012-08-07 07:03:48 <amiller> from there you can also get to the second and third smallest blocks
596 2012-08-07 07:03:58 <amiller> if you want to estimate how much work was put in a chain, including changing difficulty
597 2012-08-07 07:04:08 <lianj> but why? :D sorry if im stupid and dont get it
598 2012-08-07 07:04:10 <amiller> what you want to be looking for is the blocks with the most zeros first
599 2012-08-07 07:04:16 <lianj> ah ok.
600 2012-08-07 07:04:37 <amiller> so if you have a handful of people trying to tell you which is the largest block chain
601 2012-08-07 07:04:47 <amiller> you can efficiently narrow down which one is actually the largest
602 2012-08-07 07:04:49 <amiller> without having to iterate
603 2012-08-07 07:05:00 <lianj> oh, gotcha
604 2012-08-07 07:05:16 <amiller> even more importantly, this is a way of merging forks
605 2012-08-07 07:05:31 <amiller> so that we can resolve transactions that don't collide, and so that we don't shed work
606 2012-08-07 07:05:38 Guest28068 has quit (Changing host)
607 2012-08-07 07:05:38 Guest28068 has joined
608 2012-08-07 07:05:42 Guest28068 is now known as jgarzik
609 2012-08-07 07:05:50 <lianj> but isnt it just the highest/longest? not the largest (as in work time)
610 2012-08-07 07:06:51 <amiller> i'm assuming that we all agree that if it's possible, that we would prefer to adjust difficulty without having to rely on timestamps and a hard coded number like 10 minutes
611 2012-08-07 07:07:38 <lianj> really?
612 2012-08-07 07:07:41 <amiller> yeah
613 2012-08-07 07:07:43 <amiller> i'm explaining how to do that
614 2012-08-07 07:07:54 <amiller> if that is to be done, it is absolutely essential that we don't discard work
615 2012-08-07 07:08:16 <amiller> and also that any data structures we use are scale invariant in some way
616 2012-08-07 07:08:40 <amiller> let me say what the core of my proposal is again because it's really simple
617 2012-08-07 07:08:53 <lianj> discard work of orphan chain = back luck
618 2012-08-07 07:08:54 <amiller> for every block, in addition to the pointer to the previous head, you also include a pointer to the block with one more zero than that one
619 2012-08-07 07:08:56 <lianj> ok thanks
620 2012-08-07 07:09:24 <amiller> hashes with more zeros are higher value
621 2012-08-07 07:09:30 <amiller> this is a high-value hash highway
622 2012-08-07 07:09:52 <amiller> miners validate first and then produce work
623 2012-08-07 07:09:59 <amiller> everyone else verifiers the work first, and then looks underneath
624 2012-08-07 07:09:59 phma has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
625 2012-08-07 07:10:41 <amiller> suppose the highest value block we ever found is 8
626 2012-08-07 07:10:43 <amiller> guess how many of those we have?
627 2012-08-07 07:10:50 <amiller> if you guessed 1, then you get it
628 2012-08-07 07:11:31 <amiller> it's not 0 by definition, and it's possibly 2 or more but most likely it's 1
629 2012-08-07 07:11:56 <lianj> well, im stupid then. as for what its needed
630 2012-08-07 07:12:12 <amiller> it's a way of doing a lot of important operations like reorgs work-first
631 2012-08-07 07:12:12 <lianj> but thanks anyway for trying to explain
632 2012-08-07 07:12:22 <amiller> which makes it more likely you can distributed it and collaborate without getting ddosed
633 2012-08-07 07:12:38 <lianj> hmm ok
634 2012-08-07 07:12:40 <amiller> it also makes it so a lite client doesn't have to validate the whole chain before it's usable
635 2012-08-07 07:13:14 <amiller> without trust
636 2012-08-07 07:13:19 <amiller> i suppose that's the most important part
637 2012-08-07 07:13:23 <amiller> but all of it fits together
638 2012-08-07 07:19:04 <jgarzik> Scanned 5492921 tx, 192610 blocks (0 failures)
639 2012-08-07 07:19:04 <jgarzik> real 626m4.240s
640 2012-08-07 07:19:04 <jgarzik> user 618m12.598s
641 2012-08-07 07:19:04 <jgarzik> sys 1m22.600s
642 2012-08-07 07:19:09 <jgarzik> or about 146/second
643 2012-08-07 07:19:12 <jgarzik> whee!
644 2012-08-07 07:19:44 <Diablo-D3> full blockchain scan?
645 2012-08-07 07:19:48 <jgarzik> yep
646 2012-08-07 07:20:09 <Diablo-D3> thats... ten hours?
647 2012-08-07 07:20:23 <jgarzik> yep
648 2012-08-07 07:20:26 <Diablo-D3> wat.
649 2012-08-07 07:24:09 osxorgate has joined
650 2012-08-07 07:30:13 [Tycho] has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
651 2012-08-07 07:30:25 <lianj> jgarzik: does 3a17dace09ffb919ed627a93f1873220f4c975c1248558b18d16bce25d38c4b7 input:0 p2sh script run and verifies the inner script (multisig) signature for you?
652 2012-08-07 07:31:30 <jgarzik> lianj: I -think- that P2SH is still a WIP
653 2012-08-07 07:32:12 <lianj> its still in the mainnet chain and the bitcoind nodes somehow agreed that its valid. or you think they didnt run the inner script?
654 2012-08-07 07:33:28 <lianj> i somehow generate the wrong signature hash for the inner multisig script. or the multisig is just not valid
655 2012-08-07 07:42:21 roconnor__ has joined
656 2012-08-07 07:44:48 roconnor_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
657 2012-08-07 07:45:09 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
658 2012-08-07 07:47:13 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
659 2012-08-07 07:47:24 tower has joined
660 2012-08-07 07:59:24 <amiller> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98986.0
661 2012-08-07 07:59:30 <amiller> the high-value-hash highway
662 2012-08-07 08:06:47 RazielZ has joined
663 2012-08-07 08:09:36 Gladamas has quit (Quit: Got to go, or internet/client/computer crash)
664 2012-08-07 08:18:45 just4dos has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
665 2012-08-07 08:19:00 lukas has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
666 2012-08-07 08:23:53 BurtyB2 is now known as BurtyB
667 2012-08-07 08:24:36 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
668 2012-08-07 08:32:26 just4dos has joined
669 2012-08-07 08:32:44 just4dos has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
670 2012-08-07 08:33:53 <Perlboy> how does one list all addresses associated with a wallet even if they have no transactions?
671 2012-08-07 08:34:18 <Perlboy> listaccounts just gives me the name + balance
672 2012-08-07 08:34:22 <Perlboy> i want the address + balance :)
673 2012-08-07 08:34:57 <freewil> i think you'd have to call getaddressesbyaccount for each account
674 2012-08-07 08:35:05 <Perlboy> i thought as much
675 2012-08-07 08:36:35 Clipse has joined
676 2012-08-07 08:39:00 <Perlboy> any ideas how much many qps the bitcoind jsonrpc can handle?
677 2012-08-07 08:39:03 <Perlboy> 1000s?
678 2012-08-07 08:40:21 Turingi has joined
679 2012-08-07 08:42:09 lukas has joined
680 2012-08-07 08:46:31 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
681 2012-08-07 08:49:19 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
682 2012-08-07 09:01:47 molecular has joined
683 2012-08-07 09:03:43 <jgarzik> Perlboy: it's a bit limited in the current release. git HEAD makes the internal HTTP server multi-threaded, and supports JSON-RPC 2.0 batches -- that is, multiple RPCs per HTTP request.
684 2012-08-07 09:03:56 <jgarzik> Perlboy: so git goes a -lot- faster than release
685 2012-08-07 09:04:00 <jgarzik> qps-wise
686 2012-08-07 09:05:46 <Perlboy> so current stable what can I safely expect
687 2012-08-07 09:05:47 <Perlboy> 10-20?
688 2012-08-07 09:06:05 <Perlboy> only because i'm writing a heap of JSON stuff at the moment for comms to bitcoind
689 2012-08-07 09:06:16 <Perlboy> notably a large number of additions to perl's Finance::Bitcoin
690 2012-08-07 09:07:38 BurtyB has quit (Quit: Leaving)
691 2012-08-07 09:10:56 <jgarzik> Perlboy: I think you can do well in excess on 20 qps on stable... but it depends on the query too. if your disk is seek-bound and bitcoind needs to spend a long time gathering data, latency is impacted. JSON-RPC in stable is still fast.
692 2012-08-07 09:11:18 <jgarzik> Perlboy: why don't you just benchmark it yourself :)
693 2012-08-07 09:11:35 <jgarzik> Perlboy: call getconnectioncount repeatedly, and measure the time
694 2012-08-07 09:12:12 <jgarzik> getconnectioncount doesn't hit the database, so gives you an idea of raw JSON-RPC processing time
695 2012-08-07 09:14:26 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
696 2012-08-07 09:14:35 tower has joined
697 2012-08-07 09:26:29 phungus has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
698 2012-08-07 09:27:41 paraipan has joined
699 2012-08-07 09:28:05 lukas has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
700 2012-08-07 09:31:07 ageis has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
701 2012-08-07 09:34:21 LuaKT has joined
702 2012-08-07 09:34:21 LuaKT has quit (Changing host)
703 2012-08-07 09:34:21 LuaKT has joined
704 2012-08-07 09:34:56 lukas has joined
705 2012-08-07 09:39:32 ThomasV has joined
706 2012-08-07 09:43:34 fpgaminer has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
707 2012-08-07 09:43:54 fpgaminer has joined
708 2012-08-07 09:44:36 Stove has joined
709 2012-08-07 09:46:15 datagutt has joined
710 2012-08-07 09:49:56 imsaguy has quit (Excess Flood)
711 2012-08-07 09:52:17 imsaguy has joined
712 2012-08-07 09:53:06 imsaguy has quit (Client Quit)
713 2012-08-07 09:55:26 [\\\] has joined
714 2012-08-07 09:56:53 minimoose has joined
715 2012-08-07 09:57:58 [\\\] is now known as imsaguy
716 2012-08-07 10:05:57 da2ce787 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
717 2012-08-07 10:06:29 dlb76 has joined
718 2012-08-07 10:08:08 PhantomSpark has joined
719 2012-08-07 10:08:27 TD has joined
720 2012-08-07 10:10:29 minimoose_ has joined
721 2012-08-07 10:13:07 minimoose has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
722 2012-08-07 10:15:16 Lolcust has quit (Quit: Nap time)
723 2012-08-07 10:16:27 CodesInChaos has joined
724 2012-08-07 10:16:36 minimoose_ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
725 2012-08-07 10:20:08 Lolcust has joined
726 2012-08-07 10:21:52 CSpitteler has joined
727 2012-08-07 10:24:26 spitteler has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
728 2012-08-07 10:24:27 CSpitteler is now known as spitteler
729 2012-08-07 10:26:30 BurtyB has joined
730 2012-08-07 10:31:10 da2ce752 has joined
731 2012-08-07 10:37:41 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
732 2012-08-07 10:46:34 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
733 2012-08-07 10:50:21 minimoose has joined
734 2012-08-07 10:52:34 Stove has quit ()
735 2012-08-07 10:54:54 t7 has joined
736 2012-08-07 10:56:46 <slush1> luke-jr: I wasn't using that clone anyway
737 2012-08-07 10:59:04 <sipa> amiller: what a monologue :)
738 2012-08-07 10:59:26 da2ce752 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
739 2012-08-07 10:59:51 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
740 2012-08-07 11:00:23 d4de has joined
741 2012-08-07 11:00:29 just4dos has joined
742 2012-08-07 11:00:55 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
743 2012-08-07 11:02:11 slush1 has joined
744 2012-08-07 11:06:19 tonikt has joined
745 2012-08-07 11:08:46 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
746 2012-08-07 11:14:22 minimoose has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
747 2012-08-07 11:20:04 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
748 2012-08-07 11:20:34 drizztbsd has joined
749 2012-08-07 11:24:46 MC-Eeepc has joined
750 2012-08-07 11:25:35 dvide has joined
751 2012-08-07 11:50:51 OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt
752 2012-08-07 11:53:19 AlexWaters has joined
753 2012-08-07 11:55:45 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
754 2012-08-07 12:05:43 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
755 2012-08-07 12:07:02 Joric has joined
756 2012-08-07 12:07:29 ageis has joined
757 2012-08-07 12:08:13 phungus has joined
758 2012-08-07 12:11:02 cande has joined
759 2012-08-07 12:12:59 rdponticelli has joined
760 2012-08-07 12:22:16 phonebook_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
761 2012-08-07 12:30:46 phma has joined
762 2012-08-07 12:35:58 minimoose has joined
763 2012-08-07 12:36:42 pickett has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
764 2012-08-07 12:38:58 pickett has joined
765 2012-08-07 12:40:57 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
766 2012-08-07 12:42:20 MobiusL has joined
767 2012-08-07 12:42:33 random_cat__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
768 2012-08-07 12:42:46 aq83 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
769 2012-08-07 12:43:54 roconnor__ is now known as roconnor
770 2012-08-07 12:44:04 aq83 has joined
771 2012-08-07 12:46:02 slush1 has joined
772 2012-08-07 12:46:41 Joric has quit ()
773 2012-08-07 12:53:08 random_cat__ has joined
774 2012-08-07 12:59:53 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
775 2012-08-07 13:01:12 sgornick has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
776 2012-08-07 13:05:37 one_zero has quit ()
777 2012-08-07 13:10:30 mb300sd has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
778 2012-08-07 13:16:07 Davincij15 has quit ()
779 2012-08-07 13:18:56 B0g4r7__ has joined
780 2012-08-07 13:21:02 Davincij15 has joined
781 2012-08-07 13:21:33 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
782 2012-08-07 13:21:33 B0g4r7__ is now known as B0g4r7
783 2012-08-07 13:43:05 DamascusVG has quit (Quit: I Quit - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p97zsQ51Rw)
784 2012-08-07 13:44:50 bitllc has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
785 2012-08-07 13:48:59 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
786 2012-08-07 13:50:00 bitllc has joined
787 2012-08-07 13:53:45 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
788 2012-08-07 13:54:17 bitllc has joined
789 2012-08-07 13:57:20 DamascusVG has joined
790 2012-08-07 13:57:20 DamascusVG has quit (Changing host)
791 2012-08-07 13:57:20 DamascusVG has joined
792 2012-08-07 13:57:25 nsh has quit (Quit: meh)
793 2012-08-07 14:01:52 cande has joined
794 2012-08-07 14:02:18 <lianj> is bbe broken?
795 2012-08-07 14:06:37 paul0 has joined
796 2012-08-07 14:08:36 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
797 2012-08-07 14:09:53 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
798 2012-08-07 14:10:42 paraipan has joined
799 2012-08-07 14:12:14 copumpkin has joined
800 2012-08-07 14:12:28 roconnor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
801 2012-08-07 14:12:43 roconnor has joined
802 2012-08-07 14:19:23 nsh has joined
803 2012-08-07 14:19:23 nsh has quit (Changing host)
804 2012-08-07 14:19:23 nsh has joined
805 2012-08-07 14:23:49 Turingi has joined
806 2012-08-07 14:25:19 nsh has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
807 2012-08-07 14:28:48 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
808 2012-08-07 14:29:35 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #5: STILL FAILING in 1 hr 7 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/5/
809 2012-08-07 14:33:28 p0s has joined
810 2012-08-07 14:38:59 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
811 2012-08-07 14:43:25 bitllc has joined
812 2012-08-07 14:43:56 just4dos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
813 2012-08-07 14:44:32 D34TH has joined
814 2012-08-07 14:47:16 just4dos has joined
815 2012-08-07 14:54:28 just4dos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
816 2012-08-07 14:57:36 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
817 2012-08-07 14:57:50 just4dos has joined
818 2012-08-07 14:58:17 [\\\\\\\\\\\\\\] is now known as imsaguy_work
819 2012-08-07 15:28:46 osmosis has joined
820 2012-08-07 15:36:26 OneEyed has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8)
821 2012-08-07 15:39:32 nickrb has joined
822 2012-08-07 15:50:35 osxorgate has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
823 2012-08-07 15:56:04 agricocb has joined
824 2012-08-07 16:00:31 drizztbsd has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
825 2012-08-07 16:01:26 CodesInChaos has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
826 2012-08-07 16:01:47 toffoo has joined
827 2012-08-07 16:07:14 TD has joined
828 2012-08-07 16:08:25 Detritus has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
829 2012-08-07 16:10:41 drizztbsd has joined
830 2012-08-07 16:12:26 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
831 2012-08-07 16:14:38 agricocb has joined
832 2012-08-07 16:17:16 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
833 2012-08-07 16:17:43 minimoose has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
834 2012-08-07 16:17:47 Dyaheon has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
835 2012-08-07 16:17:57 Dyaheon has joined
836 2012-08-07 16:18:04 minimoose has joined
837 2012-08-07 16:26:41 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
838 2012-08-07 16:32:13 <sipa> BlueMatt: you're automatically going to build and test all pullreqs?
839 2012-08-07 16:32:42 <BlueMatt> yep
840 2012-08-07 16:32:46 <sipa> nice!
841 2012-08-07 16:32:48 nsh has joined
842 2012-08-07 16:33:17 <BlueMatt> its essentially done, just need to finish testing, fix bitcoin-qt_test and get #1658 merged
843 2012-08-07 16:33:20 <sipa> and rebuild at every update?
844 2012-08-07 16:33:24 <BlueMatt> yep
845 2012-08-07 16:33:32 <sipa> that's very useful
846 2012-08-07 16:33:56 <sipa> how long does a build+test run take?
847 2012-08-07 16:34:03 <BlueMatt> havent decided how to handle updates to master yet (ie testing for a pull going stale and needing rebase)
848 2012-08-07 16:34:06 <BlueMatt> sadly, like an hour
849 2012-08-07 16:34:22 <sipa> would better hardware help?
850 2012-08-07 16:34:48 <BlueMatt> its currently on the amazon vm for jenkins gavin pays for, if you have something better, it could be trivially shifted
851 2012-08-07 16:34:48 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
852 2012-08-07 16:35:52 <BlueMatt> so, yes
853 2012-08-07 16:35:53 <BlueMatt> ;)
854 2012-08-07 16:36:44 Detritus has joined
855 2012-08-07 16:37:31 tonikt has quit (Quit: Leaving)
856 2012-08-07 16:39:45 meelu has joined
857 2012-08-07 16:39:52 pickett has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
858 2012-08-07 16:40:36 pickett has joined
859 2012-08-07 16:40:52 <sipa> what would be required?
860 2012-08-07 16:41:37 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: can't it be made to adapt to build changes? :P
861 2012-08-07 16:42:08 <BlueMatt> something with python and the ability to chroot into an ubuntu chroot (probably copied from the current one, because I dont feel like recreating it)
862 2012-08-07 16:42:13 <TD> BlueMatt: there are quite a few server providers that charge in bitcoins. it'd be nice to send them some work vs amazon
863 2012-08-07 16:42:35 <sipa> how much RAM/disk?
864 2012-08-07 16:43:12 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: it should do a pretty good job of following anything that doesnt explicitly change paths in makefile.linux-mingw (which should be pretty stand-alone changes)
865 2012-08-07 16:43:19 <sipa> anyway, gtg
866 2012-08-07 16:43:25 <BlueMatt> TD: yea...Ill see what gavin has to say
867 2012-08-07 16:43:38 <BlueMatt> sipa: no more than ~15G disk, ram: enough to build bitcoin
868 2012-08-07 16:47:44 minimoose_ has joined
869 2012-08-07 16:50:17 minimoose has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
870 2012-08-07 16:50:17 minimoose_ is now known as minimoose
871 2012-08-07 16:54:17 topace has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
872 2012-08-07 16:54:47 topace has joined
873 2012-08-07 16:55:23 leotreasure has joined
874 2012-08-07 16:56:59 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: RE testing pull reqs... nice
875 2012-08-07 16:57:53 ZephyrVoid has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
876 2012-08-07 17:02:52 just4dos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
877 2012-08-07 17:04:42 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
878 2012-08-07 17:05:31 roconnor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
879 2012-08-07 17:05:50 roconnor has joined
880 2012-08-07 17:06:15 just4dos has joined
881 2012-08-07 17:06:38 roconnor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
882 2012-08-07 17:07:31 roconnor has joined
883 2012-08-07 17:11:09 agricocb has joined
884 2012-08-07 17:26:25 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
885 2012-08-07 17:30:47 Zarutian has joined
886 2012-08-07 17:31:02 meelu has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
887 2012-08-07 17:31:28 meelu has joined
888 2012-08-07 17:32:56 Dyaheon- has joined
889 2012-08-07 17:34:28 Dyaheon has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
890 2012-08-07 17:35:15 agricocb has joined
891 2012-08-07 17:37:29 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
892 2012-08-07 17:39:45 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
893 2012-08-07 17:41:17 agricocb has joined
894 2012-08-07 17:42:49 Maccer has quit (Excess Flood)
895 2012-08-07 17:45:40 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
896 2012-08-07 17:52:08 Gladamas has joined
897 2012-08-07 17:52:08 Gladamas has quit (Client Quit)
898 2012-08-07 17:52:38 Gladamas has joined
899 2012-08-07 17:54:06 da2ce7_d has joined
900 2012-08-07 17:55:14 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
901 2012-08-07 17:55:51 paraipan_ has joined
902 2012-08-07 17:56:09 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
903 2012-08-07 17:59:06 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
904 2012-08-07 18:02:40 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
905 2012-08-07 18:03:19 agricocb has joined
906 2012-08-07 18:07:40 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
907 2012-08-07 18:07:53 Maccer has joined
908 2012-08-07 18:10:12 ZephyrVoid has joined
909 2012-08-07 18:11:40 maqr has joined
910 2012-08-07 18:13:12 ForceMajeure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
911 2012-08-07 18:14:28 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
912 2012-08-07 18:15:55 Clipse has joined
913 2012-08-07 18:18:36 agricocb has joined
914 2012-08-07 18:18:48 pusle has joined
915 2012-08-07 18:27:37 ForceMajeure has joined
916 2012-08-07 18:27:54 Davincij15 has quit ()
917 2012-08-07 18:28:23 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
918 2012-08-07 18:28:43 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
919 2012-08-07 18:35:58 bitllc has joined
920 2012-08-07 18:38:32 Gladamas_ has joined
921 2012-08-07 18:40:21 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
922 2012-08-07 18:42:33 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
923 2012-08-07 18:43:03 Gladamas is now known as Gladamas_
924 2012-08-07 18:43:05 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
925 2012-08-07 18:54:27 <Lolcust> Hello!
926 2012-08-07 18:54:52 MC-Eeepc has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
927 2012-08-07 18:55:02 <Lolcust> Is there someplace where Bitcoin reorgs are listed in human readable (or as close to human-readable as possible) format ?
928 2012-08-07 18:55:23 <sipa> blockchain.info keeps some list, iirc
929 2012-08-07 18:55:23 MC-Eeepc has joined
930 2012-08-07 18:55:38 <Lolcust> Hm, thanks sipa
931 2012-08-07 18:55:52 <sipa> but reorgs will almost by definition not be seen by everyone, as they occur when parts of the network disagree
932 2012-08-07 18:57:51 sirk390 has joined
933 2012-08-07 19:03:03 <Lolcust> sipa well, they are "visible" when they happen (and are logged) so I was curious whether someone studies their occurence and frequency. As far as I can tell, blockchain.info isn't logging them (it is logging orphans, which is no cigar for my current direction of interest)
934 2012-08-07 19:04:14 <jgarzik> SIGH. python's standard library asynchronous-socket gadgetry "asyncore" does not properly handle odd, incredibly rare socket events like connection-refused
935 2012-08-07 19:04:17 <jgarzik> </sarcasm>
936 2012-08-07 19:04:42 * jgarzik is forced to subclass, just to fix standard lib bugs
937 2012-08-07 19:06:11 RainbowDashh has joined
938 2012-08-07 19:07:20 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
939 2012-08-07 19:08:03 ovidiusoft has joined
940 2012-08-07 19:11:46 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
941 2012-08-07 19:16:30 <helo> what were the space savings with the ultraprune?
942 2012-08-07 19:16:43 <helo> 50x smaller?
943 2012-08-07 19:17:20 <sipa> depends for what
944 2012-08-07 19:17:34 <sipa> if you want a full node, you win a few hundred MiB
945 2012-08-07 19:17:51 <sipa> if not... all depends on how many blocks you want to keep
946 2012-08-07 19:18:05 <sipa> say 150 MiB + 1.1 * size_of_kept_blocks
947 2012-08-07 19:24:07 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
948 2012-08-07 19:28:32 <helo> ahh found the post on bitcointalk, thanks
949 2012-08-07 19:29:22 <sipa> wth, i updated my ubuntu, and for a while, my keyboard didn't work
950 2012-08-07 19:29:40 <sipa> and then suddenly after several minutes, it started working again
951 2012-08-07 19:30:06 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
952 2012-08-07 19:30:09 bitllc has joined
953 2012-08-07 19:32:24 guruvan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
954 2012-08-07 19:32:24 guruvan_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
955 2012-08-07 19:32:24 MobiusL has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
956 2012-08-07 19:32:24 pickett has quit (Write error: Connection reset by peer)
957 2012-08-07 19:32:24 devrandom has quit (Write error: Connection reset by peer)
958 2012-08-07 19:32:24 random_cat__ has quit (Write error: Connection reset by peer)
959 2012-08-07 19:33:31 <sipa> TD: is there any limit you'd easily run into, when creating a large batch update in leveldb?
960 2012-08-07 19:33:39 <TD> they're held in ram
961 2012-08-07 19:34:01 <sipa> because bdb failed very quickly on large updates
962 2012-08-07 19:34:12 <TD> also, a batched update does not affect the view of the db until it's committed. to give it more similar behaviour to bdb i put a crappy layer on top that just iterates through the "current" batch update
963 2012-08-07 19:34:24 <TD> which is O(N). but you said you removed the need for that
964 2012-08-07 19:34:34 <TD> the code no longer reads back from uncommitted transactions?
965 2012-08-07 19:34:39 <sipa> indeed
966 2012-08-07 19:34:39 <TD> if so then i'm not sure what the limit it. just RAM, afaik
967 2012-08-07 19:35:15 <BlueMatt> oh, hey, now I get cc'd on every github comment response to the pull-tester email...that may not be fun
968 2012-08-07 19:36:19 <sipa> TD: i have a CCoinsView which represents the set of existing Coins, and it has several implementations (one is BDB, another provides an std::map-backed cache), and before validating and modifying a block's transactions, they are fetched into cache
969 2012-08-07 19:36:30 <TD> ok
970 2012-08-07 19:36:36 <sipa> TD: so you could say i moved the batch-of-changes to a higher layer
971 2012-08-07 19:36:48 <TD> i haven't tried any huge re-orgs with the leveldb code
972 2012-08-07 19:37:36 <sipa> anyway, if there's no direct limit to the size of a batch, i won't bother with splitting large reorgs
973 2012-08-07 19:37:42 <sipa> (for now, at least)
974 2012-08-07 19:37:58 <sipa> BlueMatt: use a separate e-mail address for the both?
975 2012-08-07 19:38:00 <sipa> *bot
976 2012-08-07 19:38:02 pusle has quit ()
977 2012-08-07 19:38:11 <BlueMatt> no, I found the settings panel ;)
978 2012-08-07 19:38:25 <BlueMatt> (it is already a separate account)
979 2012-08-07 19:39:57 <BlueMatt> TD: is the timeline for switching bitcoinj to testnet3 when bitcoind 0.7 is released?
980 2012-08-07 19:40:21 <TD> the timeline is "whenever i find time to catch up on the task backlog and update us to the new ruleset"
981 2012-08-07 19:40:41 <BlueMatt> fair enough
982 2012-08-07 19:41:52 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
983 2012-08-07 19:42:22 pickett has joined
984 2012-08-07 19:48:55 d4de has joined
985 2012-08-07 19:48:55 d4de has quit (Changing host)
986 2012-08-07 19:48:55 d4de has joined
987 2012-08-07 19:49:25 random_cat__ has joined
988 2012-08-07 19:49:40 <jgarzik> sipa: I think leveldb tries to avoid batches larger than 4MB or so
989 2012-08-07 19:49:59 <jgarzik> no idea if there is a maximum enforced size
990 2012-08-07 19:53:15 denisx has joined
991 2012-08-07 19:54:07 ahbritto_ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
992 2012-08-07 19:54:29 ahbritto has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
993 2012-08-07 19:54:40 devrandom has joined
994 2012-08-07 19:55:52 phma has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
995 2012-08-07 19:56:05 phma has joined
996 2012-08-07 19:56:44 chmod755 has joined
997 2012-08-07 20:03:42 ahbritto has joined
998 2012-08-07 20:07:27 xtor_ has joined
999 2012-08-07 20:08:56 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I like the new GitHub feature that emails me for every new pullreq :P
1000 2012-08-07 20:09:02 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1001 2012-08-07 20:09:10 extor has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1002 2012-08-07 20:10:17 Internet13 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1003 2012-08-07 20:11:36 CodesInChaos has joined
1004 2012-08-07 20:13:54 pickett has joined
1005 2012-08-07 20:14:40 guruvan_ has joined
1006 2012-08-07 20:14:52 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
1007 2012-08-07 20:15:50 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1008 2012-08-07 20:16:00 Internet13 has joined
1009 2012-08-07 20:16:18 guruvan has quit (Client Quit)
1010 2012-08-07 20:16:36 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1011 2012-08-07 20:17:09 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1012 2012-08-07 20:19:20 <BlueMatt> hmm...I havent seen that one, maybe Im just lucky
1013 2012-08-07 20:20:56 t7 has joined
1014 2012-08-07 20:21:51 Gladamas has joined
1015 2012-08-07 20:23:12 Internet13 has joined
1016 2012-08-07 20:24:49 toffoo has quit ()
1017 2012-08-07 20:27:47 Internet13 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1018 2012-08-07 20:27:54 <Cryo> again with the silk road, btc, ars. sigh
1019 2012-08-07 20:34:48 <midnightmagic> hrm?
1020 2012-08-07 20:37:04 <TD> the press loves these stories
1021 2012-08-07 20:37:19 <TD> we need to push the line that bitcoin has many applications
1022 2012-08-07 20:37:42 <TD> the meme that bitcoin isn't useful for anything except bad stuff is too pervasive still. we understand what it can do in these forums, but don't promote it well enough
1023 2012-08-07 20:38:46 <chmod755> did anybody here ever try to compile bitcoind for openwrt/mips?
1024 2012-08-07 20:39:29 <sipa> is that big endian?
1025 2012-08-07 20:39:30 <BlueMatt> TD: having tons of little merchants is nice, but not amazing, we really need one or two places accepting bitcoin that have a pretty large business
1026 2012-08-07 20:39:57 <TD> silk road gets a lot of attention because it concentrates lots of little merchants into one place that's easily browsed and measured
1027 2012-08-07 20:40:13 <chmod755> sipa: mips...not mipsel
1028 2012-08-07 20:40:14 <TD> it's actually a pretty professional operation and a white market version of the same would be useful. it does dispute mediation, escrow, merchant ratings, etc
1029 2012-08-07 20:40:33 <TD> not sure why such a thing hasn't really gained critical mass in the regular net yet, despite a few attempts
1030 2012-08-07 20:40:56 rdponticelli has joined
1031 2012-08-07 20:40:57 <TD> presumably the high risk nature of the silk road means there isn't much competition, whereas for white market goods there have been quite a few simultaneous attempts and the result is none of them got big enough to matter
1032 2012-08-07 20:41:08 <BlueMatt> agreed, consolidating works too...anything that shows a lot of merchant activity in one place
1033 2012-08-07 20:41:18 <BlueMatt> TD: how do you know so much about silk roads operations? ;)
1034 2012-08-07 20:41:28 <TD> busted! :)
1035 2012-08-07 20:41:42 <TD> the paper is quite interesting
1036 2012-08-07 20:41:58 <TD> though rather questionable. who knows how much of the feedback is real
1037 2012-08-07 20:42:09 <BlueMatt> yea...I wondered the same
1038 2012-08-07 20:42:50 <amiller> sipa, gmaxwell, did you see my suggestion about including a single additional hash in each block, so that lite clients can efficiently select the largest chain _before_ validating them
1039 2012-08-07 20:43:03 <amiller> it's far simpler than the merkle tree stuff from etotheipi's post, and it's a useful precursor to that
1040 2012-08-07 20:43:24 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1041 2012-08-07 20:43:55 <TD> amiller: it's not correct that lite clients only need to process the best chain
1042 2012-08-07 20:44:39 <sipa> TD: amiller is talking about a design that's quite different from what we have now
1043 2012-08-07 20:44:56 <sipa> (i think)
1044 2012-08-07 20:44:59 <BlueMatt> why does make getting an error not kill the shell on set -e?
1045 2012-08-07 20:45:12 <amiller> i've talked about a lot of wildly different designs, but this one is by far the simplest change
1046 2012-08-07 20:45:21 <sipa> amiller: then i must have missed it
1047 2012-08-07 20:45:40 <sipa> i didn't read your entire monologue from last night :)
1048 2012-08-07 20:45:43 <TD> amiller: have you written a lite client? maybe i missed something obvious, but if a lite client becomes aware of a side chain, it must process it so when a switch occurs it can be done correctly
1049 2012-08-07 20:45:58 <TD> bitcoinj reads side-chain blocks and extracts transactions for that reason
1050 2012-08-07 20:46:09 <amiller> that won't be necessary in the future when etotheipi implements his proposal
1051 2012-08-07 20:46:13 <TD> i pointed this out in the thread and you simply repeated your assertion back at me
1052 2012-08-07 20:46:27 <TD> this is the "merkle tree of unspent outputs" thing?
1053 2012-08-07 20:46:39 <amiller> what i'm describing now is a simpler precursor to the merkle tree of unspent outputs
1054 2012-08-07 20:46:52 <amiller> even with the merkle tree solution, there is still a need for a lite client to validate that it has the correct head
1055 2012-08-07 20:46:55 <TD> i don't see the need for either of these proposals, honestly. as far as i can tell we'll achieve the needed scaling goals without any changes to the block format, once bloom filtering of connections is fnished
1056 2012-08-07 20:47:11 <TD> at that point spv clients scale O(wallet activity)
1057 2012-08-07 20:47:15 <TD> which is about the best you can hope for
1058 2012-08-07 20:47:32 <sipa> but at the side of the node serving the SPV node, you still have O(blockchain) activity
1059 2012-08-07 20:47:44 <sipa> eto's proposal changes that
1060 2012-08-07 20:48:03 <TD> fully validating nodes need O(system) activity anyway
1061 2012-08-07 20:48:13 <amiller> this is a shortcut
1062 2012-08-07 20:48:26 <amiller> the light client should still validate the whole chain, but it can usefully engage in transactions even before it finishes
1063 2012-08-07 20:48:31 <TD> if anything they need more with these proposals because they have to calculate and maintain the unspent output trees
1064 2012-08-07 20:49:02 <TD> amiller: how does that work? if you haven't processed all the blocks on the best chain yet, how do you avoid the risk of creating double spends?
1065 2012-08-07 20:50:19 <TD> again, i guess i don't see what problem these proposals solve. full nodes need to keep a database that tracks the spent flags of outputs, no matter what, and they need to process every transaction to do so
1066 2012-08-07 20:50:38 <amiller> yes but once they've processed the transaction they can forget the history
1067 2012-08-07 20:50:40 <TD> with the final pieces we're putting into place, SPV clients need only to fetch headers and relevant transactions for the chains they know about
1068 2012-08-07 20:50:43 <amiller> all that's needed is to have a correct head pointer
1069 2012-08-07 20:51:16 <amiller> etotheipi did a better job of explaining the value of the merkle trees thing, but i suppose if you don't believe that contributes anything then my suggestion won't either
1070 2012-08-07 20:51:19 <TD> forgetting the history (in some cases) is already a part of the original design and pruning work
1071 2012-08-07 20:51:34 <TD> i've looked at etos post a few times and yes, i didn't perceive the value
1072 2012-08-07 20:51:49 <TD> satoshis original design is sound, modulo a few missing wire protocol features that are easily added
1073 2012-08-07 20:51:50 <sipa> i think we have to distinguish between SPV nodes and light nodes
1074 2012-08-07 20:52:18 <TD> if people are using the term "lite" or "light" to mean something other than SPV then what i just said doesn't make sense, because i was using the terms interchangably
1075 2012-08-07 20:52:31 <amiller> i've also thought they were interchangeable
1076 2012-08-07 20:52:38 <TD> but i don't see any value in more lite-ness than SPV after the needed protocol changes are done
1077 2012-08-07 20:52:58 <TD> right now approaches like electrum/bccapi make sense because the only SPV implementation isn't very good :)
1078 2012-08-07 20:53:00 <TD> but we'll fix htat
1079 2012-08-07 20:53:01 <TD> that
1080 2012-08-07 20:53:05 <amiller> TD, with etotheipi's proposal, a lite client can immediately begin processing new data as long as it picks the correct head
1081 2012-08-07 20:53:21 <amiller> and with my suggestion, you can very quickly choose the correct head, and eventually be 100% sure of it
1082 2012-08-07 20:54:21 <sipa> blocks can be considered to be authenticated patches to the coinset database
1083 2012-08-07 20:54:31 <sipa> the coinbases currently commit to the block history
1084 2012-08-07 20:54:36 <sipa> but not to the obtained coinset
1085 2012-08-07 20:55:29 <sipa> so anything "independent" like an SPV node (or better) needs to see the entire history, if it needs to be sure it has seen everything
1086 2012-08-07 20:55:49 <TD> amiller: well, the client has to download the proofs of each unspent output to set up its wallet. and it has to be convinced it's on the best chain. it's unclear to me that this is usefully more efficient than just grabbing the headers and relevant transactions+linking branches
1087 2012-08-07 20:56:03 <amiller> what i am suggesting is a way of grabbing the headers in a particular order
1088 2012-08-07 20:56:05 <TD> it's still a bunch of merkle branches, headers and a bit of tx data
1089 2012-08-07 20:56:07 <sipa> there's a difference
1090 2012-08-07 20:56:16 <amiller> in an order that reveals the true amount of work as efficiently as possible
1091 2012-08-07 20:56:25 <sipa> the bloom filters would enable SPV nodes that indeed need O(wallet) activity only, but it can never be sure it has seen everything
1092 2012-08-07 20:56:26 <amiller> specifically, in order of most 'rare' hashes first
1093 2012-08-07 20:56:39 <sipa> i think both approaches are interesting
1094 2012-08-07 20:56:49 <TD> yes, a filtering spv client can be DoSd
1095 2012-08-07 20:57:01 <TD> it's unclear why nodes would do that though, especially if you pick a bunch of random ones
1096 2012-08-07 20:57:17 <amiller> well my suggestion is how to prevent that
1097 2012-08-07 20:57:18 <sipa> of course, in practice it may be enough
1098 2012-08-07 20:57:28 <sipa> but there is a theoretic difference in security
1099 2012-08-07 20:57:38 <amiller> honestly if you explain bitcoin to most people they say 'why bother, money works just fine and i have plenty'
1100 2012-08-07 20:57:52 <sipa> an SPV node that has not downloaded all blocks by itself, cannot know it has seen everything
1101 2012-08-07 20:57:53 <amiller> so we're striving for the best security
1102 2012-08-07 20:58:03 <TD> really? most people i explain it to say, "thank god for that, banks suck"
1103 2012-08-07 20:58:09 <sipa> haha
1104 2012-08-07 20:58:20 <TD> but at any rate, my issue is i don't see why these proposals are better than satoshis original design
1105 2012-08-07 20:58:31 <forrestv> TD, where's the paper about the silk road?
1106 2012-08-07 20:58:44 <sipa> i consider committing the state of the coinset to the coinbase to be a strict improvement
1107 2012-08-07 20:58:45 <TD> forrestv: arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7139v1
1108 2012-08-07 20:58:46 MobiusL has joined
1109 2012-08-07 20:58:57 <amiller> they're better because they improve security and yet are efficient and ddos resilient
1110 2012-08-07 20:59:58 <amiller> if you give me the benefit of the doubt that there will eventually be commitments to a coinset in each block, then what i'm talking about is a ddos improvement
1111 2012-08-07 21:00:34 wereHamster has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
1112 2012-08-07 21:00:50 <sipa> now, personally i think even just this approach is useful:
1113 2012-08-07 21:01:03 <TD> again, maybe i'm being slow here, but i don't see any utility in the coinset-commitment proposals. if a remote peer wants to DoS you then at the time you say "give me the merkle branch for script <X>" it just says "no such coins exist"
1114 2012-08-07 21:01:17 <TD> and now you're stuck. you can't prove it's wrong without the entire tree
1115 2012-08-07 21:01:18 <sipa> move towards 1) archive nodes (who have all blocks, but no tx or coin index), 2) validation nodes (who have the coinset, and some blocks, and bootstrap off archive nodes), 3) SPV nodes with filtered connections (connected to validating nodes)
1116 2012-08-07 21:01:46 <TD> sipa: is there any reason not to be an archival node beyond disk space?
1117 2012-08-07 21:01:56 <sipa> bandwidth
1118 2012-08-07 21:02:21 <sipa> once we commit to coinsets in blocks, a validation node can bootstrap off another validation node with the "trust best chain" security level
1119 2012-08-07 21:02:57 <sipa> the step after that is committing to an address-to-tx index, so it can also be used to serve light clients
1120 2012-08-07 21:03:08 <sipa> (imho)
1121 2012-08-07 21:03:09 <amiller> sipa, would you say there's value in an efficient "trust the best chain" procedure?
1122 2012-08-07 21:03:10 <TD> mmmm. it seems like "distributing big files" is a fairly well solved problem though.
1123 2012-08-07 21:03:27 <TD> nothing requires the current bootstrapping protocol.
1124 2012-08-07 21:03:32 wereHamster has joined
1125 2012-08-07 21:03:44 <TD> new nodes could fetch the bulk of the chain via bittorrent or something and then fetch the rest of the blocks via the standard protocol
1126 2012-08-07 21:03:55 <sipa> TD: exactly, it is a solved problem, and those archive nodes could really just be HTTP or Bittorrent servers
1127 2012-08-07 21:03:55 <TD> if you don't want to take part in serving your part of the chain, you wouldn't have to
1128 2012-08-07 21:04:09 <amiller> mmmm when you download the bulk of the chain from bittorrent, you get it in a fairly random order don't you
1129 2012-08-07 21:04:19 Gladamas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1130 2012-08-07 21:04:27 <amiller> if you realize that you're downloading a weak chain, you can stop downloading early
1131 2012-08-07 21:04:38 <sipa> you'd definitely do headers-first
1132 2012-08-07 21:04:43 <TD> well, the assumption is for bootstrapping the bulk of it is up to the last checkpoint anyway
1133 2012-08-07 21:04:45 <amiller> but the headers in which order
1134 2012-08-07 21:04:46 <sipa> so you know the best chain before downloading any blocks
1135 2012-08-07 21:05:03 <TD> and from checkpoint to head, the current way works. in future bootstrapping new nodes isn't going to be super common
1136 2012-08-07 21:05:10 <TD> as a node will be something of a non-trivial commitment
1137 2012-08-07 21:05:32 <TD> i mean, to me it feels like optimizing the installation procedure for apache
1138 2012-08-07 21:05:34 <amiller> i'm saying you can download the headers in an order that's guaranteed to give you the best chance of stopping early if you're downloading the wrong chain
1139 2012-08-07 21:05:41 <jgarzik> TD: indeed
1140 2012-08-07 21:05:48 <TD> sure, if it can be cheaply done, why not. but it doesn't change the fact that it's a "chunk of work"
1141 2012-08-07 21:06:06 <jgarzik> TD: we could just refuse to download blocks < last checkpoint, and force The Internet to find a solution :)
1142 2012-08-07 21:06:10 <jgarzik> e.g. bittorrent
1143 2012-08-07 21:06:16 <TD> heh
1144 2012-08-07 21:06:18 <sipa> that's basically what i propose
1145 2012-08-07 21:06:35 <sipa> serving the entire blockchain is not something a standard node should do
1146 2012-08-07 21:06:35 <TD> jgarzik: you mean like including the chain+index in the initial software download?
1147 2012-08-07 21:06:42 <TD> i seem to recall proposing that months ago and getting shot down :)
1148 2012-08-07 21:07:04 <jgarzik> TD: bitcoin-bootstrap.exe downloads via torrent, then exec's bitcoin-qt.exe
1149 2012-08-07 21:07:30 <jgarzik> linux users are given instructions to use a torrent client + name the file "bitcoin-bootstrap.dat"
1150 2012-08-07 21:07:48 <jgarzik> (gavin's naming suggestion -- automatically import file named X)
1151 2012-08-07 21:07:51 <TD> it can be done, though i'd go for a simpler approach - just combine the two things together and let google code serve it :)
1152 2012-08-07 21:07:59 <TD> or find some http+edge network system
1153 2012-08-07 21:08:11 <amiller> i guess if you're telling me there's no need improve on this because checkpoints work well enough already then i don't have much to add
1154 2012-08-07 21:08:14 <jgarzik> TD: if there are reliable http servers, sure
1155 2012-08-07 21:08:14 <TD> huge downloads aren't really rare these days
1156 2012-08-07 21:08:29 <sipa> amiller: i think you have a lot of very interesting ideas
1157 2012-08-07 21:08:33 <TD> amiller: well, the question is, what are the slow parts of bootstrapping a new node? and what does your proposal optimize?
1158 2012-08-07 21:08:36 <sipa> amiller: and i'm eager to here more
1159 2012-08-07 21:08:44 <sipa> amiller: but that doesn't mean they're all viable in the short term
1160 2012-08-07 21:08:53 <amiller> this is the only idea i'm claiming to be viable in the short term
1161 2012-08-07 21:09:00 <TD> finding you're on the right chain is cheap. remote peers won't even serve you a non-best chain by default. and the motivations for writing a bad peer that does isn't clear
1162 2012-08-07 21:09:02 <amiller> the coinbase commitment is next-most-viable
1163 2012-08-07 21:09:11 <TD> your bad peer would get ignored quickly enough
1164 2012-08-07 21:09:16 <sipa> amiller: i still don't know what you're proposing now
1165 2012-08-07 21:09:22 <Eliel> TD: can't you require the node to give the merkle branches needed to verify that the script doesn't exist?
1166 2012-08-07 21:09:31 <sipa> Eliel: indeed
1167 2012-08-07 21:09:37 <TD> sipa: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98986.0;topicseen
1168 2012-08-07 21:09:49 <makomk> jgarzik: asyncore's not suitable to implement anything more than toy apps as far as I know.
1169 2012-08-07 21:09:50 <sipa> there is no way to prove spentness of a txout
1170 2012-08-07 21:09:53 <TD> Eliel: how does that work? you have every possible script in the tree? no, i don't see how it's possible
1171 2012-08-07 21:10:03 <amiller> sipa, in one sentence, what i'm am proposing is to include one extra back-link in each block chain - one link to the previous block, and a second link 'up' to a hash one-bit-rarer than the previous one.
1172 2012-08-07 21:10:51 <sipa> but that requires a change to the block header, right?
1173 2012-08-07 21:10:57 <TD> amiller: lite nodes don't need the entire chain headers, by the way
1174 2012-08-07 21:11:09 <Eliel> TD: well, if the search does not require searching the whole tree but is optimized somehow, you can make do with just one branch and two leaves (that are positioned so that the requested script would be between them if it existed)
1175 2012-08-07 21:11:29 <amiller> sipa, i don't understand your question, it would require a change to the block header format, but it wouldn't require changing previous headers or anything, if that's what you meant
1176 2012-08-07 21:11:33 <TD> amiller: the chain is just a way to navigate in temporal space. in reality, headers >N blocks back are very likely to never be accessed in normal operation and can be thrown away, at the risk of being effectively disconnected from the rest of the network if a re-org deeper than that occurs
1177 2012-08-07 21:11:57 <TD> amiller: if you root N at the last checkpoint and frequently refresh those checkpoints, you only need a fixed number of headers
1178 2012-08-07 21:12:03 <TD> amiller: so handling them isn't particularly costly
1179 2012-08-07 21:12:21 <sipa> amiller: so that's a hard fork (something that committing a coinset hash to a coinbase doesn't require), which probably takes years to 1) agree upon 2) implement 3) roll-out
1180 2012-08-07 21:12:43 <amiller> 1) maybe 2) it's exceedingly simple
1181 2012-08-07 21:12:54 <sipa> amiller: it still takes years :)
1182 2012-08-07 21:12:56 <amiller> also it could be implemented just as easily in any alt chain
1183 2012-08-07 21:12:59 <BlueMatt> TD: I know its got a while before you look at it, but I went ahead and pushed my bitcoinj fullscripts branch
1184 2012-08-07 21:13:10 <TD> Eliel: ah, i see. i guess that could work, yes
1185 2012-08-07 21:13:21 <TD> Eliel: it could be quite expensive to sort every script like that
1186 2012-08-07 21:13:27 <TD> BlueMatt: cool!
1187 2012-08-07 21:13:40 galambo_ has joined
1188 2012-08-07 21:13:51 guruvan has joined
1189 2012-08-07 21:14:06 guruvan_ has joined
1190 2012-08-07 21:14:10 <forrestv> why would it take so long to roll out? we've implemented changes that break mining before pretty quickly (BIPs 16 and 30)
1191 2012-08-07 21:14:21 <TD> does anyone know how many unique addresses there are in the current block chain?
1192 2012-08-07 21:14:28 <sipa> forrestv: those are not backward-incompatible changes
1193 2012-08-07 21:14:43 <amiller> this could easily be backward compatible
1194 2012-08-07 21:14:45 <TD> forrestv: only miners had to upgrade for those. hard-forking changes require everyone to upgrade whether they mine or not
1195 2012-08-07 21:14:48 <sipa> forrestv: so they only require a miner supermajority, and not a full network upgrade (== everyone)
1196 2012-08-07 21:14:57 <forrestv> why does this require a full network upgrade?
1197 2012-08-07 21:15:10 <forrestv> stick it in the coinbase q:
1198 2012-08-07 21:15:11 <sipa> if it changes the header, it means a full network upgrade
1199 2012-08-07 21:15:22 <sipa> if you put it in the coinbase, sure, that's something else
1200 2012-08-07 21:15:38 <sipa> but that does mean you don't get to see the upward-pointers before downloading the block
1201 2012-08-07 21:15:48 <sipa> (unless we add a special getheaderpluscoinbase P2P command)
1202 2012-08-07 21:15:51 <amiller> can you download just the coinbase?
1203 2012-08-07 21:15:57 <forrestv> with the amount of stuff we're considering requiring in the coinbase, it might make sense to only have a hash of some extensible structure in the coinbase
1204 2012-08-07 21:16:07 galambo has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1205 2012-08-07 21:16:45 <amiller> but yes i'm recommending a change to the header
1206 2012-08-07 21:17:08 <sipa> in that case, i don't think it's worth the effort
1207 2012-08-07 21:17:09 galambo has joined
1208 2012-08-07 21:17:18 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1209 2012-08-07 21:17:23 <sipa> (though it may be considered if at some point we plan a breaking change anyway)
1210 2012-08-07 21:18:02 <weex> would anyone like to admit having a hand in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin?
1211 2012-08-07 21:18:22 <TD> even then, i still don't really buy it. but whatever.
1212 2012-08-07 21:18:22 <amiller> sure, perhaps it will be the breaking change that also includes the unspent-coins commitment
1213 2012-08-07 21:18:25 <sipa> weex: i never touched it
1214 2012-08-07 21:18:56 <amiller> i'm trying to get feedback on how to explain this solution, but i'm not sure where my explanation is missing its mark
1215 2012-08-07 21:19:02 galambo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1216 2012-08-07 21:19:14 <TD> having actually written a lite client (has anyone else?), if an UOMT appeared tomorrow in blocks and was being checked/built by all the miners, i wouldn't prioritize using it
1217 2012-08-07 21:19:15 <amiller> somewhere in between checkpoints-already-work-fine and changes-are-too-hard-anyway
1218 2012-08-07 21:19:16 <weex> sipa: smart, i'm going to spend some time on it but taking it slow
1219 2012-08-07 21:19:40 <TD> because it isn't clear to me, how it would really help the user experience, and it'd require a lot of new code that would replace existing code which already works
1220 2012-08-07 21:20:10 has joined
1221 2012-08-07 21:20:21 <amiller> it's only going to get harder to make important changes later, i don't see the harm in striving now to build an efficiently scalable system
1222 2012-08-07 21:20:24 <sipa> amiller: the theoretical advantage is nice; finding the best tip in O(log n) instead of O(n) (i assume, i didn't read the proposal entirely)
1223 2012-08-07 21:20:30 <TD> syncing the chain, at least on mobile, is already barely UX impacting and we're missing simple optimizations
1224 2012-08-07 21:20:37 <sipa> amiller: but downloading headers has a very low constant factor
1225 2012-08-07 21:21:00 <amiller> it's a linear factor if you have many chains to choose from
1226 2012-08-07 21:21:33 <TD> but you don't
1227 2012-08-07 21:21:52 <sipa> you always just ask for the best chain, and download all headers from there to the point you know
1228 2012-08-07 21:22:08 <amiller> right but potentially that is still linear in the amount of time it's been since you can remember
1229 2012-08-07 21:22:16 <sipa> yes, it is linear
1230 2012-08-07 21:22:31 <amiller> so this solves exactly that problem but in much better than linear time
1231 2012-08-07 21:22:33 <sipa> but with a very small constant factor (80 bytes transfer + storage) per block
1232 2012-08-07 21:22:40 <sipa> yes, i agree with that
1233 2012-08-07 21:22:50 <amiller> ok that's all i suppose
1234 2012-08-07 21:23:42 torsthaldo has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1235 2012-08-07 21:24:42 <sipa> is your research actually about bitcoin?
1236 2012-08-07 21:24:53 <TD> i still don't get it. you don't really download the headers, even with a lite client. you download headers+[relevant] transactions
1237 2012-08-07 21:24:58 <amiller> TD, tomorrow's security problems are not predicted from todays UX problems
1238 2012-08-07 21:25:00 <TD> today that means you download full blocks
1239 2012-08-07 21:25:11 <TD> tomorrow it means headers+filtered transactions and their branches
1240 2012-08-07 21:25:30 <TD> but you still need the transaction data from each block, or some indication that there are no relevant transactions in that header
1241 2012-08-07 21:25:32 <sipa> TD: and with amiller's idea, it could be some headers+filtered transactions
1242 2012-08-07 21:25:47 <sipa> but i agree the practical advantage is really small
1243 2012-08-07 21:25:51 <TD> you need the header to verify the branch
1244 2012-08-07 21:25:59 <sipa> with his proposal, you wouldn't
1245 2012-08-07 21:26:19 <TD> if a remote node gives me a header that contains a backwards link to a block 10 blocks back
1246 2012-08-07 21:26:22 <midnightmagic> amiller: oh hey is this that state snapshot idea you were talking about like a year ago with me?
1247 2012-08-07 21:26:27 <TD> and there is a relevant transaction 5 blocks back
1248 2012-08-07 21:26:43 <TD> i don't see how being able to efficiently know which block is 10 blocks back helps me. i need the merkle root of the block 5 blocks back
1249 2012-08-07 21:26:52 <amiller> midnightmagic, it builds on that. and i'm pretty much assigning credit to the state snapshot thing to etotheipi now who has the clearest proposal for it
1250 2012-08-07 21:26:53 <TD> so the remote node has to send me that anyway
1251 2012-08-07 21:26:56 <sipa> TD: this is about finding the best header to ask for
1252 2012-08-07 21:27:11 <midnightmagic> amiller: I love that you're still thinking about it. :) awesome
1253 2012-08-07 21:27:13 <sipa> TD: there could be a "give me all filtered transactions up to block X"
1254 2012-08-07 21:27:20 <sipa> but it does indeed seem pointless
1255 2012-08-07 21:27:24 <TD> you need the headers for every block containing a filtered transaction
1256 2012-08-07 21:27:28 <sipa> as we are already trusting the peer to give us everything
1257 2012-08-07 21:27:34 <amiller> TD, i am interested in solving fundamental problems for the scalability of bitcoin thousands of years into the future, not just for the next few months when no one ever falls behind more than ten blocks
1258 2012-08-07 21:27:35 <TD> and a header that doesn't connect to other headers you have, is worthless. it can be fake.
1259 2012-08-07 21:27:47 <amiller> solving those problems now is important even earlier, because it will build more trust that the protocol is correct and sound
1260 2012-08-07 21:27:59 <TD> amiller: bitcoin already scales just fine with the much simpler changes that are already being implemented. i have full trust that the existing protocol is correct and sound. that's why i'm pushing back.
1261 2012-08-07 21:28:10 <TD> the 10 blocks was just an example to illustrate that you need the headers
1262 2012-08-07 21:28:16 <TD> which at any rate are a trivial amount of data.
1263 2012-08-07 21:28:19 <TD> a few megs per year
1264 2012-08-07 21:28:24 <sipa> indeed
1265 2012-08-07 21:28:31 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1266 2012-08-07 21:28:44 chmod755 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1267 2012-08-07 21:28:56 <sipa> i think i see the theoretical advantage, but i think the improvement will ever outweigh other costs that need to be paid anyway
1268 2012-08-07 21:29:10 <TD> i'm not sure i even see a theoretical advantage. when i try to figure out how i'd use it in bitcoinj, i hit a wall
1269 2012-08-07 21:29:11 <midnightmagic> :-)
1270 2012-08-07 21:29:41 <TD> i don't understand what code changes i'd make because i still need an unbroken chain of headers, of all chains the client is aware of, with the relevant transactions in each
1271 2012-08-07 21:30:36 <sipa> anyway, amiller, am i right to assume this: if i'd ask for all transactions that affect me, the peer would send me (the blockchain tip header, any block header of a block with a tx in i need, all block headers in the tree formed by the previous 2 upwards until genesis)
1272 2012-08-07 21:30:58 <sipa> + the filtered transactions and their merkle paths to their containing block
1273 2012-08-07 21:31:22 <amiller> sipa, with etotheipis proposal you would not need to ask for 'trasnactions' that affect you, you would ask for unspent-coins that affect you, and you ask for those using just the current head
1274 2012-08-07 21:31:35 <sipa> amiller: right, agree
1275 2012-08-07 21:31:48 <amiller> sipa, if you do not know the current head, then you say 'give me the largest head and the supporting proof data in order!'
1276 2012-08-07 21:32:06 <amiller> then your bitcoinj client says at the bottom 'estimated work in chain: a bajliion megahashes. likelihood: 67%'
1277 2012-08-07 21:32:10 <amiller> and then that lieklihood increases very rapidly
1278 2012-08-07 21:32:19 <amiller> rapidly at first, slowing down once it reaches 99.99% and so on
1279 2012-08-07 21:32:26 <sipa> right
1280 2012-08-07 21:32:36 <amiller> if you eventually get to 100%, then you've in fact validated the entire chain from front to back like a full node
1281 2012-08-07 21:32:45 <sipa> its usefulness only becomes apparent in combination with a coinset commitment
1282 2012-08-07 21:32:52 <amiller> thats correct
1283 2012-08-07 21:32:56 <sipa> as that means you don't need intermediate block headers
1284 2012-08-07 21:33:04 eoss has joined
1285 2012-08-07 21:33:04 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1286 2012-08-07 21:33:04 eoss has joined
1287 2012-08-07 21:33:49 toffoo has joined
1288 2012-08-07 21:34:11 Karmaon__ has joined
1289 2012-08-07 21:34:56 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1290 2012-08-07 21:35:26 <TD> ok
1291 2012-08-07 21:35:46 Karmaon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1292 2012-08-07 21:36:02 <midnightmagic> sipa: when you timed your ultraprune node during the initial download and found it took 22 minutes, were you using -loadblock= or -connect= ?
1293 2012-08-07 21:36:11 <sipa> midnightmagic: loadblock
1294 2012-08-07 21:38:41 <sipa> midnightmagic: it's 7 minutes now (if i disable sigchecking), by the way
1295 2012-08-07 21:39:17 <amiller> thank you for your discussion and feedback sipa, you too TD
1296 2012-08-07 21:39:37 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1297 2012-08-07 21:39:50 <sipa> amiller: i'll definitely want to talk to you at the london conference
1298 2012-08-07 21:40:27 <amiller> awesome, i have no idea who else is going
1299 2012-08-07 21:40:27 <TD> yes, looking forward to meeting you! it'll be cool
1300 2012-08-07 21:40:31 <amiller> both of you! cool
1301 2012-08-07 21:40:44 <TD> don't take my feedback the wrong way. we need more people thinking about these core design issues
1302 2012-08-07 21:40:57 <amiller> no worries
1303 2012-08-07 21:41:00 <TD> in this case i happen to think the current plan will scale well. but there are many other aspects of bitcoin that can use attention
1304 2012-08-07 21:42:55 <midnightmagic> sipa: from bitcoin/ultraprune?! it's definitely not 7 minutes for me..! :-)
1305 2012-08-07 21:43:56 <midnightmagic> sipa: around block 4207 it's taking upwards of about 0.7s per block. is there some trick I'm missing? what's the bitcoind command-line you're using?
1306 2012-08-07 21:44:28 <BlueMatt> I believe he disabled script checking for the 7 minute one
1307 2012-08-07 21:44:51 <BlueMatt> or maybe just sig verification
1308 2012-08-07 21:44:51 <sipa> midnightmagic: in my current branch on github there are two test commits on top
1309 2012-08-07 21:44:54 has quit (guruvan|!~guruvan@gateway/tor-sasl/guruvan|)
1310 2012-08-07 21:44:59 <midnightmagic> sipa: yep got those.
1311 2012-08-07 21:45:12 <sipa> one calculates a checksum for the entire coinset at every block, which is insanely expensive
1312 2012-08-07 21:45:17 <sipa> just remove that commit
1313 2012-08-07 21:45:20 <midnightmagic> oh okay
1314 2012-08-07 21:45:36 <sipa> and the one before keeps the coinset in a std::map instead of on disk
1315 2012-08-07 21:45:48 <sipa> so you need to wipe your directory every time :)
1316 2012-08-07 21:45:54 <sipa> so remove that one too
1317 2012-08-07 21:46:09 <midnightmagic> that would explain why I had to wipe the directory every time
1318 2012-08-07 21:48:04 <midnightmagic> woops there we go.
1319 2012-08-07 21:48:42 <midnightmagic> i wonder what happens if I -checklevel=0
1320 2012-08-07 21:51:35 nickrb has joined
1321 2012-08-07 21:54:08 paraipan_ has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
1322 2012-08-07 21:54:56 paraipan has joined
1323 2012-08-07 21:56:03 <sipa> midnightmagic: ./bitcoind -logtimestamps -datadir=/home/pw/.bitcoin-tmpfs -loadblock=blk0001-mainnet.dat
1324 2012-08-07 21:56:06 <sipa> is what i use
1325 2012-08-07 21:56:19 <sipa> (for now; the 7 minutes was not in a tmpfs)
1326 2012-08-07 21:56:55 <midnightmagic> thanks
1327 2012-08-07 21:57:04 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1328 2012-08-07 21:57:04 random_cat__ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1329 2012-08-07 21:57:40 rdponticelli has joined
1330 2012-08-07 21:57:51 pickett has joined
1331 2012-08-07 21:58:15 random_cat__ has joined
1332 2012-08-07 21:58:24 [Tycho] has joined
1333 2012-08-07 21:58:51 <midnightmagic> sipa: lots of reorgs?
1334 2012-08-07 21:59:20 <sipa> oh, it always says reorg
1335 2012-08-07 21:59:26 <sipa> every block connection is a reorg
1336 2012-08-07 21:59:33 <midnightmagic> it's doing them 20 at a time.
1337 2012-08-07 21:59:41 <sipa> yes
1338 2012-08-07 21:59:44 <midnightmagic> k
1339 2012-08-07 22:00:18 <midnightmagic> oh yeah that's nice and quick even up to 160k
1340 2012-08-07 22:00:26 <BlueMatt> arg...we have a ton of issues in the test suites on master...
1341 2012-08-07 22:02:05 <midnightmagic> sipa: how difficult would it be do you think in terms of difficulty to built in a manual-pruning mechanism? i want to be able to prune tx I know are unspendable (like the grafitti stuff)
1342 2012-08-07 22:02:55 <sipa> midnightmagic: i suppose you could have a script or so that gets executed for each block, and replies which tx's are not to be stored
1343 2012-08-07 22:02:55 <midnightmagic> given list-of-tx, prune them regardless of spend-status (or perhaps just if they are end-of-line unspent so breaks can't be created)
1344 2012-08-07 22:03:12 <sipa> ultraprune is not really tx-pruning, it is block-pruning
1345 2012-08-07 22:03:21 * midnightmagic clearly misunderstood.
1346 2012-08-07 22:03:22 <sipa> it can only remove entire old blocks
1347 2012-08-07 22:03:33 <sipa> (but they can still have spendable tx's)
1348 2012-08-07 22:03:47 <sipa> however, you could prevent storing in the first place i guess
1349 2012-08-07 22:03:50 <midnightmagic> this is not the stemming embryonically-envisioned in satoshi's paper?
1350 2012-08-07 22:03:55 <sipa> no
1351 2012-08-07 22:03:57 <midnightmagic> doh
1352 2012-08-07 22:04:03 <sipa> imho, it's better ;)
1353 2012-08-07 22:04:49 <sipa> it keeps 1) a block database with all block, or only recent blocks
1354 2012-08-07 22:04:58 <sipa> and 2) a separate set of unspent txouts
1355 2012-08-07 22:05:13 <midnightmagic> so, this is removing blocks which have no unspent tx in them, and reconnecting via some kind of new edge?
1356 2012-08-07 22:05:26 <sipa> no
1357 2012-08-07 22:05:36 <midnightmagic> sorry I wrote that and clicked enter before you began explaining.
1358 2012-08-07 22:05:41 <sipa> it only needs the blocks for serving them, reorganising, and rescanning
1359 2012-08-07 22:05:50 <sipa> for all the rest, the txout set suffices
1360 2012-08-07 22:06:15 <sipa> so if you give up the ability to serve/rescan/reorg old blocks, there is no need to keep them
1361 2012-08-07 22:06:17 <midnightmagic> tx verification just checks (and potentially updates) the txout set then?
1362 2012-08-07 22:06:22 <sipa> yes
1363 2012-08-07 22:07:01 <midnightmagic> is it possible to verify the state of the txout set in terms of transition? (so I can detect corruption for example)?
1364 2012-08-07 22:07:21 <sipa> not really
1365 2012-08-07 22:07:22 <midnightmagic> or am I trusting that my on-disk txout set is Just Accurate.
1366 2012-08-07 22:07:28 <sipa> that
1367 2012-08-07 22:07:30 <midnightmagic> k
1368 2012-08-07 22:07:37 <sipa> there are some tests possible
1369 2012-08-07 22:07:40 <sipa> but not too many
1370 2012-08-07 22:07:51 <sipa> however, the txout set is very small (120 MB or so)
1371 2012-08-07 22:08:08 <midnightmagic> that surprises me, but I don't know why it would.
1372 2012-08-07 22:08:29 <sipa> why it would what?
1373 2012-08-07 22:08:39 <sipa> there are only 1.5-2 million unspent txout
1374 2012-08-07 22:08:41 <midnightmagic> surprise me that the txout set seems so small.
1375 2012-08-07 22:09:30 <midnightmagic> this txout set could be used to do a sort of slow satoshi-style when-i'm-not-busy tx stemming of old blocks too..
1376 2012-08-07 22:10:03 <sipa> ?
1377 2012-08-07 22:10:29 <sipa> once you prune the actual blocks, you can't serve them, reorg before them, or rescan them
1378 2012-08-07 22:10:36 <sipa> so they become useless whatsoever
1379 2012-08-07 22:10:39 <midnightmagic> if this txout set is so small, and the block headers are so small, would a traditional tx stemming also yield (after a db checkpoint+restore when complete) a much smaller set of blk* files? I thought the last time gmaxwell said something about tx stemming, it wouldn't really result in a very much smaller set of stored data.
1380 2012-08-07 22:11:09 <sipa> well, i suppose you can still rescan non-spent txs
1381 2012-08-07 22:11:12 <midnightmagic> not totally useless: you can still do a tx verification and detect corruption..?
1382 2012-08-07 22:11:22 <sipa> ?
1383 2012-08-07 22:11:45 <sipa> so say you have a current unspent-txout-set, and pruned blk* files
1384 2012-08-07 22:11:49 <sipa> what do you want to do?
1385 2012-08-07 22:12:01 <sipa> imho, those blk* files are completely useless
1386 2012-08-07 22:12:38 <midnightmagic> hrm..
1387 2012-08-07 22:13:33 <TD> amiller: here's a problem i have thought a lot about but can't find a solution too (that doesn't involve a hard forking change)
1388 2012-08-07 22:13:47 <TD> amiller: today SPV clients cannot verify block coinbases, which means they cannot verify the inflation schedule is being followed
1389 2012-08-07 22:14:05 <TD> if many users or merchants ended up on SPV clients, this would open the door to a miner conspiracy in order to change the inflation rules
1390 2012-08-07 22:14:19 <TD> predictable inflation is one of the most fundamental rules of bitcoin. it is one of the foundational agreements that binds us all together
1391 2012-08-07 22:14:21 <midnightmagic> what's stored with the txout set? can you cryptographically verify after all that your txout set has been corrupted if someone tries to spend one that has become corrupted? do we have the merkle for that tx?
1392 2012-08-07 22:14:24 <TD> so if it was violated, that would be very bad
1393 2012-08-07 22:14:34 <TD> unfortunately checking coinbase values means having a copy of every transaction, afaict
1394 2012-08-07 22:14:43 <sipa> midnightmagic: the txout set coins txouts; nothing more
1395 2012-08-07 22:14:51 <amiller> TD, not necessarily
1396 2012-08-07 22:14:55 <sipa> midnightmagic: s/coins/contains/
1397 2012-08-07 22:14:57 <amiller> aren't transactions already stored in blocks according to merkle trees
1398 2012-08-07 22:15:10 <amiller> so it's not a list of the whole set of transactions
1399 2012-08-07 22:15:12 <midnightmagic> sipa: so either i find theunspent, or not, and if not, I assume it's invalid rather than checking up to the block header. correct?
1400 2012-08-07 22:15:12 <TD> yes. but transactions don't specify their input values, only output values. it's a very terse protocol
1401 2012-08-07 22:15:50 <TD> coinbase txn value is inflation + fees
1402 2012-08-07 22:15:59 <midnightmagic> sipa: I really really like how fast this -loadblock is btw. so awesome.
1403 2012-08-07 22:16:00 <TD> you can't know the fees without knowing every transaction in the block and all dependent transactions
1404 2012-08-07 22:16:37 <sipa> you need the set of unspent txouts, to verify that, imho
1405 2012-08-07 22:16:44 <BlueMatt> TD: if you did the commit-all-unspent-outputs-to-merkle-tree change, then you would be able to check it with nothing more than that set, which could be gotten from some 3rd-party?
1406 2012-08-07 22:17:02 <BlueMatt> makes you only half-SPV, but still
1407 2012-08-07 22:17:12 <BlueMatt> do it for 1/100 blocks, np
1408 2012-08-07 22:17:25 <TD> yeah i was thinking of random spot checks
1409 2012-08-07 22:17:49 <TD> if every SPV client does random spot checks and broadcasts messages saying "this block is bogus and here's a proof" ...... then possibly you can prevent such an attack
1410 2012-08-07 22:18:08 <TD> a spot check doesn't technically need all the transactions. you can ask the remote nodes to provide the connected transactions + merkle branches on demand
1411 2012-08-07 22:18:18 <BlueMatt> ye
1412 2012-08-07 22:18:19 <BlueMatt> p
1413 2012-08-07 22:18:19 <sipa> well, right now, most of the generation is from the subsidy, and not from fees
1414 2012-08-07 22:18:29 <sipa> wait, never mind
1415 2012-08-07 22:18:30 <TD> it's a crapton of data to download, possibly, but if you only do it rarely ...
1416 2012-08-07 22:18:31 <amiller> the subsidy rules aren't any harder to check than those transactions
1417 2012-08-07 22:18:42 <TD> right, the inflation is the easy part to check
1418 2012-08-07 22:18:44 <midnightmagic> i don't need to verify the coinbase generation of a txout, just that spending a tx is spending one from the unspent tx's merkle, verifiable up to the block hash. or am I misapprehending the utility of that?
1419 2012-08-07 22:18:46 <TD> it's just a formula
1420 2012-08-07 22:19:30 <TD> one interesting question is whether the work can be sharded amongst co-operating SPV clients
1421 2012-08-07 22:19:33 mologie has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1422 2012-08-07 22:19:42 <TD> i'm not sure. need to ponder it more
1423 2012-08-07 22:19:47 <amiller> TD, i'm positive it can
1424 2012-08-07 22:20:36 <amiller> the property that's interesting about hash graphs is that every step requires only local information
1425 2012-08-07 22:20:48 <amiller> i like to imagine that the gossip network is a sort of magical hash inversion cloud
1426 2012-08-07 22:20:52 <midnightmagic> sipa: Here's my concern, and why I'm peppering with questions. I experience a LOT of db* corruption. Like a lot. Probably once a week, due to unsupported patches, or crashed machines, or unstable hardware. I'm just curious how I would verify and/or rebuild my txout set cheaply in the event I trashed it because of one of the many, weird problems I tend to encounter. :)
1427 2012-08-07 22:20:55 <TD> one question is whether a miner conspiracy could just agree to create a kind of "second coinbase" that grants themselves free money, possibly connected to a transaction that was already spent. so maybe you do need the unspent outputs
1428 2012-08-07 22:20:59 <amiller> you give it a hash, it tells you what's on the other side - as long as someone has computed that hash before and propagated it
1429 2012-08-07 22:21:08 <TD> but then ..... you can't rely on miners to give you that. because the attack under consideration is a miner conspiracy
1430 2012-08-07 22:21:11 <sipa> midnightmagic: you use -loadblock :)
1431 2012-08-07 22:21:14 <midnightmagic> lol
1432 2012-08-07 22:21:15 <amiller> everything necessary for validation can be done using only a single piece of information and queries to that network
1433 2012-08-07 22:21:19 <amiller> so that's why it's easy to shard
1434 2012-08-07 22:21:28 <midnightmagic> well. okay.
1435 2012-08-07 22:21:38 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1436 2012-08-07 22:21:38 <TD> midnightmagic: would you be willing to test the leveldb branch?
1437 2012-08-07 22:21:44 <sipa> midnightmagic: but i hope leveldb also helps to reduce or random database corruptions
1438 2012-08-07 22:21:54 <TD> midnightmagic: i'd really like to know if leveldb is more robust than bdb. if you really hit problems once a week, we can find out soon enough
1439 2012-08-07 22:21:55 <midnightmagic> TD: yeah I'd love to.
1440 2012-08-07 22:21:58 <sipa> (i have never in my life seen a corrupted database, by the way)
1441 2012-08-07 22:22:06 <sipa> well, happing on my own machine
1442 2012-08-07 22:22:19 <midnightmagic> sipa: I have, they happen all the time to me it's horrible.
1443 2012-08-07 22:22:22 <BlueMatt> TD: would have to keep coinbases around (or just block->coinbase hash map) and then require each tx link back to generation if you dont want to store the info...
1444 2012-08-07 22:22:26 <TD> midnightmagic: there's a pull req open for it
1445 2012-08-07 22:22:30 <BlueMatt> TD: talk about expensive though...
1446 2012-08-07 22:22:31 <midnightmagic> TD: okay
1447 2012-08-07 22:22:42 <[Tycho]> Somehow my bitcoind lost a transaction in it's database today. Cost me 150 BTC
1448 2012-08-07 22:22:54 <midnightmagic> [Tycho]: good christ!
1449 2012-08-07 22:23:16 <TD> BlueMatt: it may not be possible to prevent a miner conspiracy unless you run a full node, is what i'm starting to think :(
1450 2012-08-07 22:23:18 <midnightmagic> TD: okay I'll go check it out.
1451 2012-08-07 22:23:22 <TD> [Tycho]: holy crap. what do you mean by "lost a transaction" ?
1452 2012-08-07 22:23:26 <sipa> TD: well, that's the point, no?
1453 2012-08-07 22:23:28 <TD> [Tycho]: what exactly happened?
1454 2012-08-07 22:23:32 <TD> sipa: yeah
1455 2012-08-07 22:23:37 <BlueMatt> TD: yea...
1456 2012-08-07 22:23:40 mologie has joined
1457 2012-08-07 22:23:58 <sipa> TD: you're essentially trying to have some of the expensive checks from fully-validating code in SPV
1458 2012-08-07 22:23:59 <TD> sipa: it makes me think maybe SPV nodes should try and upgrade themselves to full pruning nodes as soon as they think they might have the horsepower for it
1459 2012-08-07 22:24:07 <[Tycho]> TD, it refused to accept some block from the network because one of TXes in this block has unknown input.
1460 2012-08-07 22:24:23 <BlueMatt> TD: having libraries that can upgrade smoothly should make that easier, but I generally agree
1461 2012-08-07 22:24:28 <[Tycho]> And continued to build wrong branch
1462 2012-08-07 22:24:29 <midnightmagic> bitcoind yesyouarestrongenoughpleaseupgradeyourself
1463 2012-08-07 22:24:33 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 23:21:07.305546 ERROR: FetchInputs() : 2ea46b0736 prev tx fb6e078d22 index entry not found
1464 2012-08-07 22:24:33 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 23:21:07.306372 ERROR: Reorganize() : ConnectBlock failed
1465 2012-08-07 22:24:44 <sipa> sounds like a faulty block
1466 2012-08-07 22:24:53 <TD> [Tycho]: the rest of the network accepted the block?
1467 2012-08-07 22:24:54 <TD> wow
1468 2012-08-07 22:24:59 <TD> i never heard of bdb simply losing entries like that
1469 2012-08-07 22:24:59 <[Tycho]> Yes.
1470 2012-08-07 22:25:06 <TD> i wonder how that happened
1471 2012-08-07 22:25:22 <TD> block contents are committed in a single db tx, right?
1472 2012-08-07 22:25:23 <sipa> [Tycho]: wait, your miner node considered the block invalid, but the rest of the network considered it valid?
1473 2012-08-07 22:25:26 <sipa> TD: yes
1474 2012-08-07 22:25:29 <[Tycho]> sipa: yes
1475 2012-08-07 22:25:38 <sipa> [Tycho]: that means your miner is now stuck?
1476 2012-08-07 22:25:48 <sipa> (or at least, was)
1477 2012-08-07 22:25:50 <TD> [Tycho]: the 150 BTC comes from a 3 block fork?
1478 2012-08-07 22:25:54 <[Tycho]> sipa: it was. I redownloaded the chain.
1479 2012-08-07 22:25:59 <[Tycho]> TD: yes.
1480 2012-08-07 22:26:04 <TD> nuts
1481 2012-08-07 22:26:18 <BlueMatt> TD: oh, Ive heard of it
1482 2012-08-07 22:26:21 <midnightmagic> so ou spent 150 btc from some other source, and effectively you were the victim of a "double-spend"
1483 2012-08-07 22:26:23 <TD> i guess that would explain why some nodes seem to get permanently stuck on ancient blocks
1484 2012-08-07 22:26:27 <midnightmagic> but not really.
1485 2012-08-07 22:26:48 <BlueMatt> TD: or, at least, hear-say from bug reports that look exactly like that
1486 2012-08-07 22:26:49 <TD> i really hope leveldb is more robust. but i have no evidence one way or another
1487 2012-08-07 22:26:53 <[Tycho]> midnightmagic: no, I had to pay those 150 BTC to my users.
1488 2012-08-07 22:27:01 <TD> BlueMatt: i wonder how that happens
1489 2012-08-07 22:27:27 <BlueMatt> I always assumed bad disk writes and/or bad shutdown, but I really dont know, and I doubt that was [Tycho]'s issue here
1490 2012-08-07 22:27:29 <sipa> i have seen many reports of stuck nodes
1491 2012-08-07 22:27:42 <sipa> but everytime they sent their database dir to me or gmaxwell, it just worked fine
1492 2012-08-07 22:27:47 <[Tycho]> Also this TX was rejected earlier.
1493 2012-08-07 22:27:50 <midnightmagic> [Tycho]: because you do pps..? so there were 3 blocks, not necessarily right after one another, before you noticed the problem, oh wow that sucks man. :(
1494 2012-08-07 22:27:55 <amiller> can't you have an intermittent bad read?
1495 2012-08-07 22:27:55 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, same, Ive seen that issue too
1496 2012-08-07 22:28:00 <BlueMatt> stuck for one, not for others
1497 2012-08-07 22:28:03 <TD> bad reads, i never heard of that
1498 2012-08-07 22:28:04 <sipa> so i have really yet to see a stuck node
1499 2012-08-07 22:28:05 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 22:52:39.817055 ERROR: FetchInputs() : 2ea46b0736 mapTransactions prev not found fb6e078d22
1500 2012-08-07 22:28:05 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 22:52:39.817086 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : FetchInputs failed 2ea46b0736
1501 2012-08-07 22:28:06 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 22:52:39.817112 storing orphan tx 2ea46b0736
1502 2012-08-07 22:28:07 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 22:52:39.817342 stored orphan tx 2ea46b0736 (mapsz 10001)
1503 2012-08-07 22:28:09 <[Tycho]> 08/06/12 22:52:39.817388 mapOrphan overflow, removed 1 tx
1504 2012-08-07 22:28:12 <TD> i guess anything is possible with faulty hardware
1505 2012-08-07 22:28:19 <[Tycho]> midnightmagic: I'm paying for both PPS and Prop
1506 2012-08-07 22:28:33 <midnightmagic> [Tycho]: my sympathies :-/
1507 2012-08-07 22:28:36 <BlueMatt> TD: but its a bad read in one app, but when they upload it, it reads fine...just really strange
1508 2012-08-07 22:28:40 <[Tycho]> sipa: I saw many stuck blockchain downloads.
1509 2012-08-07 22:28:46 <amiller> it would have been read correctly the second time
1510 2012-08-07 22:28:52 <BlueMatt> [Tycho]: how did missing a block result in you losing btc?
1511 2012-08-07 22:28:53 <amiller> they read it once to fail, and read it again to upload it
1512 2012-08-07 22:29:05 <BlueMatt> [Tycho]: unless you actually lost the privkey, there is no reason to have lost btc
1513 2012-08-07 22:29:14 <[Tycho]> BlueMatt: 3 blocks were mined, but rejected by the network.
1514 2012-08-07 22:29:17 <TD> BlueMatt: he means he lost the coinbases because he mined on a fork
1515 2012-08-07 22:29:22 <BlueMatt> oh..
1516 2012-08-07 22:29:25 <midnightmagic> BlueMatt: His miner was building on a bad fork, and he pays for submitted work.
1517 2012-08-07 22:29:42 <sipa> [Tycho]: if you have one, you can always make a backup of the datadir (while the node is not running, and including all extra tempfiles, but not the wallet), and send it to me
1518 2012-08-07 22:29:50 <TD> [Tycho]: if you have a tolerance for risk, you could test leveldb too :-)
1519 2012-08-07 22:30:02 <midnightmagic> *I* have a risk tolerance!! ha ha haaa!
1520 2012-08-07 22:30:08 <sipa> what bitcoind is your code based on today, [Tycho]?
1521 2012-08-07 22:30:16 <[Tycho]> sipa: I think that this may also depend on bitcoind version sometimes.
1522 2012-08-07 22:30:30 <[Tycho]> sipa: not sure. May be somewhere around 0.3.4
1523 2012-08-07 22:30:47 <[Tycho]> It's pretty modified.
1524 2012-08-07 22:30:49 <sipa> i assume 0.3.24?
1525 2012-08-07 22:30:54 <BlueMatt> a more advanced system where you only mine on the best block averaged somehow between several bitcoind blocks would be appropriate for a major pool imho...
1526 2012-08-07 22:31:02 <midnightmagic> TD: are you mike hearn?
1527 2012-08-07 22:31:07 <BlueMatt> yes
1528 2012-08-07 22:31:20 <[Tycho]> TD: I'm trying other database too, but not it production yet.
1529 2012-08-07 22:31:25 <BlueMatt> (not that bitcoind should break, but still...)
1530 2012-08-07 22:31:25 <midnightmagic> you look so young
1531 2012-08-07 22:31:37 * midnightmagic feels old again and thinks maybe growing a longer beard is time
1532 2012-08-07 22:32:21 <midnightmagic> lol where's lfm to comiserate anyway
1533 2012-08-07 22:32:26 <sipa> [Tycho]: based on 0.3.x, but it does have mapOrphan overflow removal?
1534 2012-08-07 22:32:48 <[Tycho]> sipa: I'm picking useful updates manually.
1535 2012-08-07 22:33:35 <TD> midnightmagic: yes
1536 2012-08-07 22:33:56 <TD> midnightmagic: i'm 28
1537 2012-08-07 22:34:16 <sipa> wow, at least you're still older than me :p
1538 2012-08-07 22:34:20 <TD> haha
1539 2012-08-07 22:34:23 <midnightmagic> =]
1540 2012-08-07 22:34:30 <sipa> (i'm 27.9)
1541 2012-08-07 22:34:48 <TD> open source is a young mans game .... then girlfriends/wives/families come and you have to wait until you get paid for it, or retire :)
1542 2012-08-07 22:35:00 <[Tycho]> I was surprised that it can forget some TX that was included into known earlier block.
1543 2012-08-07 22:35:00 <TD> [Tycho]: ok. i don't know if leveldb would apply to such an old branch
1544 2012-08-07 22:35:03 <midnightmagic> 36.. 35? i dunno i don't like working it out and I never remember.
1545 2012-08-07 22:35:11 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1546 2012-08-07 22:35:21 <TD> [Tycho]: yes. i think that surprises everyone. "not losing data" is basically the entire justification for bdbs existence
1547 2012-08-07 22:35:30 <TD> midnightmagic: lol. hardly an old man yourself
1548 2012-08-07 22:35:36 <TD> or woman. but i'm guessing man
1549 2012-08-07 22:35:45 <midnightmagic> no, I just look old lol
1550 2012-08-07 22:36:09 <midnightmagic> (apologies for the age tangent. :)
1551 2012-08-07 22:36:22 <[Tycho]> TD: no, I don't have experience with levelDB. I'm experimenting with more familiar mongodb.
1552 2012-08-07 22:36:40 <sipa> [Tycho]: it would really have been interesting to see that database of the setup that failed to find that tx
1553 2012-08-07 22:36:54 mologie has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1554 2012-08-07 22:36:55 <[Tycho]> I captured that state
1555 2012-08-07 22:37:05 <[Tycho]> Not sure how complete it is.
1556 2012-08-07 22:37:19 <sipa> would you mind publishing it somewhere (obviously without wallet) ?
1557 2012-08-07 22:37:58 <TD> mongodb?
1558 2012-08-07 22:38:05 <TD> will that be fast enough?
1559 2012-08-07 22:38:10 mologie has joined
1560 2012-08-07 22:38:25 <sipa> doesn't sound very appropriate here
1561 2012-08-07 22:38:27 <[Tycho]> Why not ?
1562 2012-08-07 22:38:37 <TD> btw
1563 2012-08-07 22:38:38 <[Tycho]> sipa: checking it now
1564 2012-08-07 22:38:43 <TD> [Tycho]: you know that mongodb is Affero GPL?
1565 2012-08-07 22:38:44 <luke-jr> TD: some people are paid for open source
1566 2012-08-07 22:38:46 * midnightmagic not for the first time thinks of a distributed db and how it might do cooperative block validation independent of the frontend nodes connecting to it
1567 2012-08-07 22:38:47 <[Tycho]> TD: mongo is fast.
1568 2012-08-07 22:38:48 <TD> [Tycho]: it means you have to open source your node
1569 2012-08-07 22:39:07 <TD> luke-jr: sure. like me ;) i was just kidding
1570 2012-08-07 22:39:12 <luke-jr> :P
1571 2012-08-07 22:39:13 <jgarzik> TD: only if you distribute binaries, right?
1572 2012-08-07 22:39:18 <luke-jr> jgarzik: no
1573 2012-08-07 22:39:23 <TD> jgarzik: AGPL is weird
1574 2012-08-07 22:39:26 <[Tycho]> TD, it's not used in my nodes yet.
1575 2012-08-07 22:39:28 <luke-jr> AGPL = code must be available to anyone who accesses it over the network
1576 2012-08-07 22:39:39 <TD> though weirdly, the language drivers are apache licensed
1577 2012-08-07 22:39:57 <TD> so it's not clear to me, if the requirement applies to apps that use it, or just modifications of the db server itself
1578 2012-08-07 22:40:05 <TD> at any rate, the licensing seems complicated and painful
1579 2012-08-07 22:41:49 <TD> [Tycho]: anyway, let us know how it goes
1580 2012-08-07 22:41:52 <TD> [Tycho]: would be cool to find out
1581 2012-08-07 22:42:00 <[Tycho]> Checked AGLP license, not applies to my case.
1582 2012-08-07 22:42:06 <[Tycho]> *AGPL
1583 2012-08-07 22:42:41 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1584 2012-08-07 22:42:42 <[Tycho]> Also, I may consider opensourcing my client if it will work. It's not the pool core itself.
1585 2012-08-07 22:43:11 ForceMajeure has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1586 2012-08-07 22:43:36 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1587 2012-08-07 22:48:56 LuaKT has quit ()
1588 2012-08-07 22:49:09 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1589 2012-08-07 22:52:08 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1590 2012-08-07 22:54:01 <midnightmagic> TD: so.. can I use this thing normally? what happens if I try and merge it with next-test?
1591 2012-08-07 22:54:07 * midnightmagic tries to merge it with next-test
1592 2012-08-07 22:54:54 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: I don't expect that will work well, since it's probably based on a more recent master
1593 2012-08-07 22:55:07 <[Tycho]> sipa: found it, but blk0001.dat and /database directory are missing.
1594 2012-08-07 22:55:37 <sipa> [Tycho]: in that case, it won't be very useful, i'm afraid
1595 2012-08-07 22:55:43 <[Tycho]> Sorry.
1596 2012-08-07 22:55:55 <midnightmagic> luke-jr: I've come to expect that git merging is never easy, or even realistically do-able in most of the cases I attempt. I'm used to something a little more capable I'm afraid. ):-(
1597 2012-08-07 22:56:20 <[Tycho]> There are some errors in db.log, but it doesn't contains timestamps, so I don't know if it's relevant.
1598 2012-08-07 22:56:50 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: it's easy for common things
1599 2012-08-07 22:57:04 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: the problem comes when master has merged something included in next-test, but only after rebasing it
1600 2012-08-07 22:57:15 <luke-jr> the rebasing and history rewriting is what creates the problems :/
1601 2012-08-07 22:57:46 <midnightmagic> luke-jr: for the simple stuff, yes for sure. but sometimes I really miss the full transitive closure, best-effort sibling/ancestor merging of some of the commercial tools. oh well..
1602 2012-08-07 22:57:51 theorbtwo has joined
1603 2012-08-07 23:06:02 Internet13 has joined
1604 2012-08-07 23:07:05 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1605 2012-08-07 23:08:21 <midnightmagic> boo EXCEPTION: 11DbException Db::del: Cannot allocate memory bitcoin in ProcessMessages()
1606 2012-08-07 23:11:03 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1607 2012-08-07 23:11:57 <sipa> midnightmagic: what branch?
1608 2012-08-07 23:13:00 <midnightmagic> sipa: that's the leveldb bitcoin I'm running right now. It appears to have recovered after I closed down some other processes.
1609 2012-08-07 23:13:19 <midnightmagic> sipa: it looks like it was trying to mlock because there was plenty of swap avail.
1610 2012-08-07 23:17:08 <[Tycho]> Also using centralized DB will make running multiple clients more convenient. (centralized for just one service / business, not total)
1611 2012-08-07 23:20:08 barbarousrelic has joined
1612 2012-08-07 23:25:56 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1613 2012-08-07 23:27:21 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1614 2012-08-07 23:31:54 RainbowDashh has joined
1615 2012-08-07 23:34:34 da2ce7 has joined
1616 2012-08-07 23:34:42 rdponticelli has joined
1617 2012-08-07 23:35:10 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1618 2012-08-07 23:37:26 pooler has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1619 2012-08-07 23:38:29 denisx has joined
1620 2012-08-07 23:38:56 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1621 2012-08-07 23:40:21 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1622 2012-08-07 23:41:26 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1623 2012-08-07 23:42:49 ThomasV has joined
1624 2012-08-07 23:45:57 Gladamas has joined
1625 2012-08-07 23:50:16 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1626 2012-08-07 23:55:59 Gladamas has joined