<<  >> (p.105)
    Author Topic: [ANN] ¤ DMD Diamond 3.0 | Scarce ¤ Valuable ¤ Secure | PoS 3.0 | Masternodes 65%  (Read 1260993 times)
    This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.

    • danbi
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 393
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
     #2081
    Quote from: polanskiman on July 15, 2014, 12:44:55 PM

    I am not worried about the cosmetic issue, but more about the the fact that most of my minting attempts are unsuccessful.

    If the issue is a timing issue isn't there something you guys could do to limit this?


    No.

    Minting is a random process. You mint a block, then post it to the network (block chain) and see if you were first. If the block is accepted in the block chain, you add the earnings to your wallet. If not, you lose nothing. As if you never minted. It is exactly like orphans on the network.

    The reasons we see more PoS orphans than PoW orphans is.. as expected, because of the low PoS difficulty. We would see about the same amount of PoW orphans if we had such low PoW difficulty and the same number of miners. In order for PoS difficulty to rise, more people should open their wallets for minting. You won't mint more often, but the percentage of failed attempts will be much lower.
    This is essentially what can be done.

    Contrary to PoW, where you compete based on your hash power, with PoS you compete based on your (individual amount's) coin age (the multiplication of coin amount with the age of when they arrived in your wallet). You waste more or less the same hash power (the wallet hashes sha256 for PoS) as you would with or without successful stake. The hashing exists in order to provide for randomness, or luck, it is very low-rate.

    In theory, this could be fixed: have your wallet do massive hashing, even connect an external sha256 hasher, or few -- and the result you will receive is only almost guaranteed lack of orphans, you will not stake more or more frequently.

    Having said all this, yes, it's disturbing to look at these things in the logs. Perhaps the logging routines might be redesigned to only log successful stakes, but.. that changes the purpose of the log, which is to provide you aid in diagnosing what and why happens.

    PS: Yes, and the latency also plays a role. Try to have connection to well connected nodes. At the moment, 193.68.21.19 is one such node.
    BTC: 15cJkRupKAkGr6sTxj1Uzb6uHbvuRyK1GL
    DMD: dJZEqNcjiUiMMd8DKBFS9oMWtArAD2GCHr

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 15, 2014, 12:58:35 PM
     #2082

    Vote for Diamond DMD on

    click pic or this link https://www.mintpal.com/voting#DMD

    dont spend BTC for voting! (better spend btc to buy more dmd   Cool )
    create a mintpal account deposite some little btc amount buy some other coins
    (or deposit and sell some other coins which are traded at mintpal)
    after that u able to vote each hour for free
    once u did one trade on mintpal u allowed to vote each hour without need to pay


    place #146 now

    i set a bounty from my own wallet (not foundation)

    paying 1 DMD to everyone who reached a new rank

    so first one reporting #145 and walletaddress
    @ http://bit.diamonds/community/index.php/topic,16.0.html
    gets 1 DMD by me (or alex if he faster and ninja rewarding again)

    IMPORTANT only claim rewards on
    http://bit.diamonds/community/index.php/topic,16.0.html
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • pallas
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2716
    Merit: 1094


    Black Belt Developer


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 01:16:42 PM
     #2083
    Quote from: danbi on July 15, 2014, 05:38:06 AM
    Quote from: pallas on July 14, 2014, 07:32:23 PM
    Quote from: danbi on July 14, 2014, 06:25:35 PM
    Quote from: pallas on July 14, 2014, 12:40:34 PM
    paper wallet looks good! :-)
    on a side note, the new wallet uses more cpu than the previous one.
    maybe it's because of the new indexing, danbi probably knows...
    Another culprit might be coin control. Do you have that enabled?

    It should be disabled, however I don't know a way to check it on a headless client.
    An additional information which may be useful is that the load on the CPU is almost constant and about 30% higher with the new wallet.

    30% is way too much. Haven't noticed such behavior myself..
    There is no way to enable, or use coin control in the headless client at the moment. This is one deficiency of the current implementation.

    However, higher CPU utilization might be because you have more coins eligible for stake. What happens if you disable PoS?

    Not much coins indeed. But if I lock the wallet cpu usage drops drammatically: POS is to blame ;-)

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 15, 2014, 01:28:07 PM
     #2084
    Quote from: pallas on July 15, 2014, 01:16:42 PM
    Not much coins indeed. But if I lock the wallet cpu usage drops drammatically: POS is to blame ;-)

    thats normal POS behavior

    part of POS attempts is "hashing" (a simple version of it but still done by cpu and create cpu useage)
    who is able mint the next block is same as in mining a competition
    the only difference is that its can be only  donewith wallet included miner
    and that the hashing power (or lets say chance to successful mint a block) is also moddified with the coin weight

    the reward when u successful mint is then determined by the coin-age once u won the minting competition
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • pallas
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2716
    Merit: 1094


    Black Belt Developer


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 01:36:43 PM
     #2085
    Quote from: cryptonit on July 15, 2014, 01:28:07 PM
    Quote from: pallas on July 15, 2014, 01:16:42 PM
    Not much coins indeed. But if I lock the wallet cpu usage drops drammatically: POS is to blame ;-)

    thats normal POS behavior

    part of POS attempts is "hashing" (a simple version of it but still done by cpu and create cpu useage)
    who is able mint the next block is same as in mining a competition
    the only difference is that its can be only  donewith wallet included miner
    and that the hashing power (or lets say chance to successful mint a block) is also moddified with the coin weight

    the reward when u successful mint is then determined by the coin-age once u won the minting competition

    thanks for the answer.
    a couple questions:
    should cpu usage go down when coinage of my coins is over?
    the cpu of my nas is very weak (currently at 70% usage): if I get more coins in the future, will I risk not being able to mint any longer?

  • danbi
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 393
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 02:24:13 PM
     #2086
    Quote from: pallas on July 15, 2014, 01:36:43 PM
    Quote from: cryptonit on July 15, 2014, 01:28:07 PM
    Quote from: pallas on July 15, 2014, 01:16:42 PM
    Not much coins indeed. But if I lock the wallet cpu usage drops drammatically: POS is to blame ;-)

    thats normal POS behavior

    part of POS attempts is "hashing" (a simple version of it but still done by cpu and create cpu useage)
    who is able mint the next block is same as in mining a competition
    the only difference is that its can be only  donewith wallet included miner
    and that the hashing power (or lets say chance to successful mint a block) is also moddified with the coin weight

    the reward when u successful mint is then determined by the coin-age once u won the minting competition

    thanks for the answer.
    a couple questions:
    should cpu usage go down when coinage of my coins is over?
    the cpu of my nas is very weak (currently at 70% usage): if I get more coins in the future, will I risk not being able to mint any longer?

    If I remember right, the compiler you used is an older one (gcc 4.2.1?) -- this means much less optimizations and you might have resorted to -O0 to make it run. Compiler optimizations make very big difference.

    The wallet tries to pace down the PoS hashing, but it still has to do calculations. When you have more eligible coins, it wastes more CPU. When you have more addresses within the wallet, it wastes more CPU. Therefore, when you mint your coins, for a period of time you will have lower CPU usage.

    Look at compiler optimizations first Smiley
    BTC: 15cJkRupKAkGr6sTxj1Uzb6uHbvuRyK1GL
    DMD: dJZEqNcjiUiMMd8DKBFS9oMWtArAD2GCHr

  • polanskiman
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 03:08:46 PM
    Last edit: July 15, 2014, 03:45:55 PM by polanskiman
     #2087
    Quote from: danbi on July 15, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
    Quote from: polanskiman on July 15, 2014, 12:44:55 PM

    I am not worried about the cosmetic issue, but more about the the fact that most of my minting attempts are unsuccessful.

    If the issue is a timing issue isn't there something you guys could do to limit this?


    No.

    Minting is a random process. You mint a block, then post it to the network (block chain) and see if you were first. If the block is accepted in the block chain, you add the earnings to your wallet. If not, you lose nothing. As if you never minted. It is exactly like orphans on the network.

    The reasons we see more PoS orphans than PoW orphans is.. as expected, because of the low PoS difficulty. We would see about the same amount of PoW orphans if we had such low PoW difficulty and the same number of miners. In order for PoS difficulty to rise, more people should open their wallets for minting. You won't mint more often, but the percentage of failed attempts will be much lower.
    This is essentially what can be done.

    Contrary to PoW, where you compete based on your hash power, with PoS you compete based on your (individual amount's) coin age (the multiplication of coin amount with the age of when they arrived in your wallet). You waste more or less the same hash power (the wallet hashes sha256 for PoS) as you would with or without successful stake. The hashing exists in order to provide for randomness, or luck, it is very low-rate.

    In theory, this could be fixed: have your wallet do massive hashing, even connect an external sha256 hasher, or few -- and the result you will receive is only almost guaranteed lack of orphans, you will not stake more or more frequently.

    Having said all this, yes, it's disturbing to look at these things in the logs. Perhaps the logging routines might be redesigned to only log successful stakes, but.. that changes the purpose of the log, which is to provide you aid in diagnosing what and why happens.

    PS: Yes, and the latency also plays a role. Try to have connection to well connected nodes. At the moment, 193.68.21.19 is one such node.

    Noted. So basically being in the third world, on a MAC, far form everyone dooms me! Wink Yes that node is the only one that I have added to the .conf file.

    I think it's fine that the wallet logs these failed attempts. What I did is simply export the transactions into a .csv file then filtered it.

    How would you go on and make the wallet hash more without any external hasher?

  • polanskiman
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 03:22:38 PM
    Last edit: July 15, 2014, 03:35:14 PM by polanskiman
     #2088
    Quote from: cryptonit on July 15, 2014, 12:56:14 PM
    Quote from: polanskiman on July 15, 2014, 12:44:55 PM
    Quote from: cryptonit on July 12, 2014, 09:55:05 AM
    still it would be interesting to know why u fail more than others
    it could be afaik u not from europe or usa that u have not much fast responding nodes near u
    and u have timing issues get ur minting confirmed before someone else successful minted?

    If the issue is a timing issue isn't there something you guys could do to limit this?

    Here is a list of my minting attempts; Only 8 where successful to this day out of 39 attempts:

    as i said around 1% of minting attempts have to try a second time all other successful first attempt
    we both use wallet 2.0.3 i am on windows u are on mac?
    then we need to get feedback from someone on mac too if he have a poor minting success rate too

    if not compare the latency of the peers that are connected to you

    im my first tough would be true and u have high latency to your peers there is nothing we from diamond team can do to fix it

    promote dmd in ur area try get some peers running with good latency for u and add them to ur addnode list

    as we learn from mining latency is a factor
    and its also a factor in minting
    ur minting attempt is only successful if he is proagated fast enough in the network


    Yes on a Mac Pro - 8 cores. Wallet 2.0.3

    Latency seems indeed high with recommended node (193.68.21.19):

    Code:
    PING 193.68.21.19 (193.68.21.19): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=0 ttl=48 time=288.511 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=286.108 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=286.064 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=286.237 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=4 ttl=49 time=285.977 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=286.908 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=6 ttl=49 time=285.876 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=7 ttl=48 time=286.490 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=8 ttl=49 time=286.652 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=9 ttl=49 time=286.026 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=10 ttl=49 time=286.078 ms

    I've tested all peers currently connected to my wallet. All the IPs that responded have a response time over 280ms.

    What do you guys get?

  • alt-fan
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 25
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 05:28:14 PM
     #2089

    Hi everyone,

    I've been away from the crypto world for the last few months. I'm glad to see the great progress the DMD community has made all this time.

    Here's my (newbie) question: I have quite a few DMD at an old wallet (before switching to the new algorithm) and a few more at Cryptsy. Can I transfer them to the new wallet? How? Is it just replacing wallet.dat in the new wallet installation and withdrawing the 'old' DMD from Cryptsy to a new wallet address?

    I've just downloaded the new wallet and I'm waiting for it to sync, but I'm asking before I made any stupid move and risk losing the coins!

    Thanks!

  • danbi
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 393
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 05:50:57 PM
     #2090
    Quote from: polanskiman on July 15, 2014, 03:22:38 PM

    Latency seems indeed high with recommended node (193.68.21.19):

    Code:
    PING 193.68.21.19 (193.68.21.19): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=0 ttl=48 time=288.511 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=286.108 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=286.064 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=286.237 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=4 ttl=49 time=285.977 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=286.908 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=6 ttl=49 time=285.876 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=7 ttl=48 time=286.490 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=8 ttl=49 time=286.652 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=9 ttl=49 time=286.026 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=10 ttl=49 time=286.078 ms

    I've tested all peers currently connected to my wallet. All the IPs that responded have a response time over 280ms.

    What do you guys get?

    Well, it's on my (country-wide) network, so

    PING 193.68.21.19 (193.68.21.19): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=9.308 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=9.201 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=8.969 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=9.484 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=9.747 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=9.265 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=6 ttl=60 time=9.029 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=7 ttl=60 time=9.412 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=8 ttl=60 time=9.563 ms
    64 bytes from 193.68.21.19: icmp_seq=9 ttl=60 time=9.200 ms

    --- 193.68.21.19 ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 8.969/9.318/9.747/0.227 ms

    From the node to north-west Europe (Amsterdam)

    PING ns.ripe.net (193.0.9.6): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=41.126 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=41.023 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=40.963 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=40.903 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=41.125 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=40.897 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=41.208 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=41.025 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=41.015 ms
    64 bytes from 193.0.9.6: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=41.155 ms

    --- ns.ripe.net ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 40.897/41.044/41.208/0.101 ms

    (Frankfurt is less)

    From the node to US East Coast:

    PING svnmir.nyi.freebsd.org (96.47.72.118): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=0 ttl=44 time=111.453 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=1 ttl=44 time=111.126 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=2 ttl=44 time=111.160 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=3 ttl=44 time=111.444 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=4 ttl=44 time=111.070 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=5 ttl=44 time=111.051 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=6 ttl=44 time=111.203 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=7 ttl=44 time=111.125 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=8 ttl=44 time=111.050 ms
    64 bytes from 96.47.72.118: icmp_seq=9 ttl=44 time=111.233 ms

    --- svnmir.nyi.freebsd.org ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 111.050/111.191/111.453/0.141 ms

    From the node to the US West Coast:

    PING svnmir.ysv.freebsd.org (8.8.178.107): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=0 ttl=42 time=188.895 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=1 ttl=42 time=189.371 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=2 ttl=42 time=189.402 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=3 ttl=42 time=188.861 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=4 ttl=42 time=189.056 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=5 ttl=42 time=189.369 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=6 ttl=42 time=189.098 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=7 ttl=42 time=188.529 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=8 ttl=42 time=188.519 ms
    64 bytes from 8.8.178.107: icmp_seq=9 ttl=42 time=188.618 ms

    --- svnmir.ysv.freebsd.org ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 188.519/188.972/189.402/0.327 ms


    It is clear you need more nodes close by. Perhaps investigate the network topology and see where another more or less permanent node cane placed.
    BTC: 15cJkRupKAkGr6sTxj1Uzb6uHbvuRyK1GL
    DMD: dJZEqNcjiUiMMd8DKBFS9oMWtArAD2GCHr

  • danbi
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 393
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
     #2091
    Quote from: alt-fan on July 15, 2014, 05:28:14 PM

    Hi everyone,

    I've been away from the crypto world for the last few months. I'm glad to see the great progress the DMD community has made all this time.

    Here's my (newbie) question: I have quite a few DMD at an old wallet (before switching to the new algorithm) and a few more at Cryptsy. Can I transfer them to the new wallet? How? Is it just replacing wallet.dat in the new wallet installation and withdrawing the 'old' DMD from Cryptsy to a new wallet address?

    I've just downloaded the new wallet and I'm waiting for it to sync, but I'm asking before I made any stupid move and risk losing the coins!

    Thanks!

    Make sure you always keep copy of your original wallet. Also keep copies after you spend coins and after you mint -- the change left from the transfer goes to a new address in your wallet, unless you use coin control to send it to a specific already existing one. PoS has the capability to create new addresses too, although this is rare.

    You should not expect any problems. It is also possible to download the pre-built block chain (look at the first post for links) to speed up syncing. But if you do it the traditional way, keep in mind the syncing is likely to stop at the switch point -- you need to stop and start the wallet again for it to continue past hat point. A well known artifact from the switch time, which we work on.

    We went to great lengths to ensure old wallets/coins are well preserved. If you run into any troubles, please share the details.
    BTC: 15cJkRupKAkGr6sTxj1Uzb6uHbvuRyK1GL
    DMD: dJZEqNcjiUiMMd8DKBFS9oMWtArAD2GCHr

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 15, 2014, 06:07:06 PM
     #2092
    Quote from: polanskiman on July 15, 2014, 03:22:38 PM

    I've tested all peers currently connected to my wallet. All the IPs that responded have a response time over 280ms.

    What do you guys get?

    60ms
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 15, 2014, 06:11:57 PM
     #2093
    Quote from: alt-fan on July 15, 2014, 05:28:14 PM
    How? Is it just replacing wallet.dat in the new wallet installation and withdrawing the 'old' DMD from Cryptsy to a new wallet address?

    I've just downloaded the new wallet and I'm waiting for it to sync, but I'm asking before I made any stupid move and risk losing the coins!

    Thanks!

    use the old wallet.dat with new wallet
    and transfer the dmd from cryptsy to ur old wallet adress
    ur address didnt change

    welcome back alt-fan at the bright side of life
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • pallas
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2716
    Merit: 1094


    Black Belt Developer


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 07:19:19 PM
     #2094
    Quote from: danbi on July 15, 2014, 02:24:13 PM
    Quote from: pallas on July 15, 2014, 01:36:43 PM
    thanks for the answer.
    a couple questions:
    should cpu usage go down when coinage of my coins is over?
    the cpu of my nas is very weak (currently at 70% usage): if I get more coins in the future, will I risk not being able to mint any longer?

    If I remember right, the compiler you used is an older one (gcc 4.2.1?) -- this means much less optimizations and you might have resorted to -O0 to make it run. Compiler optimizations make very big difference.

    The wallet tries to pace down the PoS hashing, but it still has to do calculations. When you have more eligible coins, it wastes more CPU. When you have more addresses within the wallet, it wastes more CPU. Therefore, when you mint your coins, for a period of time you will have lower CPU usage.

    Look at compiler optimizations first Smiley

    I used to compile it with the default setting of -O2.
    Just tried with -O3 but I don't see any difference.
    Maybe I should compile a newer gcc but it will take ages!

  • alt-fan
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 25
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 08:23:36 PM
     #2095
    @danbi and @cryptonit: thanks!

    Everything worked like a charm: in less than 30 minutes, I downloaded wallet and blockchain, and accessed my old DMD balance. However, I can't withdraw from cryptsy (it says their wallet is offline, updating to the new version...).

    Two questions:
    a) Must I leave the wallet open at all times to earn PoS? What if I encrypt/lock it? Will PoS still be active?
    b) when launching the wallet, it takes ages to connect to the first nodes in the network. anything I can do to speed this up?

  • pokeytex
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1504
    Merit: 1002



    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 10:30:23 PM
     #2096
    Quote from: HR on July 15, 2014, 07:43:41 AM
    Quote from: pokeytex on July 14, 2014, 11:55:57 PM
    Woo Hoo!  I got my DMD's in my wallet today!  It took a couple phone calls to them but they finally pulled through.  Once I had them on the phone they quickly figured out what happened.  I am a happy camper again!  I am going to test some more small purchases on Cryptsy and send to my wallet to see how it goes.  I did inform the gentleman I spoke with that we are now on 2.0.3.  He was not aware of the new wallet.

    Pokeytex


    Pokeytex, I'm still trying to get mine (they send me a periodic/idiotic e-mail saying they appreciate my patience, etc., but do nothing, and that after having told me over 6 weeks ago that a re-send had been approved); what phone number did you use, and who did you speak with?

    PM me if you want to keep this below radar.

    TIA



    HR
    I sent you a PM did you get it?
    Poke

  • HR
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1176
    Merit: 1011


    Transparency & Integrity


    View Profile
    July 15, 2014, 11:58:15 PM
     #2097
    Quote from: pokeytex on July 15, 2014, 10:30:23 PM
    HR
    I sent you a PM did you get it?
    Poke

    I was reading around and came across this, and, the answer now is, YES! Wink

    The PM notifications just don't seem to get my attention. lol

    Thanks again for the info. I'm sure it will help.

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 16, 2014, 12:02:23 AM
     #2098
    Quote from: alt-fan on July 15, 2014, 08:23:36 PM
    @danbi and @cryptonit: thanks!

    Everything worked like a charm: in less than 30 minutes, I downloaded wallet and blockchain, and accessed my old DMD balance. However, I can't withdraw from cryptsy (it says their wallet is offline, updating to the new version...).

    Two questions:
    a) Must I leave the wallet open at all times to earn PoS? What if I encrypt/lock it? Will PoS still be active?
    b) when launching the wallet, it takes ages to connect to the first nodes in the network. anything I can do to speed this up?

    u have a diamond.conf file in diamond appdata folder as suggested on first page of this ANN?

    Quote
    listen=1
    server=1
    rpcuser=USER_NAME
    rpcpassword=SOME_PASSWORD
    rpcport=17772
    addnode=193.68.21.19
    also delete old peers.dat

    regarding cryptsy we got used to their maintainaces take ages Sad
    we didnt tell them to upgrade wasnt a mandatory wallet release
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • cryptonit
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3052
    Merit: 1053


    bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds


    View Profile WWW
    July 16, 2014, 12:06:59 AM
     #2099


    Vote for Diamond DMD on

    click pic or this link https://www.mintpal.com/voting#DMD

    dont spend BTC for voting! (better spend btc to buy more dmd   Cool )
    create a mintpal account deposite some little btc amount buy some other coins
    (or deposit and sell some other coins which are traded at mintpal)
    after that u able to vote each hour for free
    once u did one trade on mintpal u allowed to vote each hour without need to pay


    place #143 now

    i set a bounty from my own wallet (not foundation)

    paying 1 DMD to everyone who reached a new rank

    so first one reporting #142 and walletaddress
    @ http://bit.diamonds/community/index.php/topic,16.0.html
    gets 1 DMD by me (or alex if he faster and ninja rewarding again)

    IMPORTANT only claim rewards on
    http://bit.diamonds/community/index.php/topic,16.0.html
     
      ✦ Diamond [DMD] ✦    ✦ uNiq.Diamonds ✦ 
    ✦ Scarce✦✦✦✦ Valuable ✦✦✦✦ Secure ✦                     ▬ a collector experience ▬                

  • polanskiman
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    July 16, 2014, 05:56:41 AM
    Last edit: July 16, 2014, 07:10:44 AM by polanskiman
     #2100
    Quote from: danbi on July 15, 2014, 05:50:57 PM
    It is clear you need more nodes close by. Perhaps investigate the network topology and see where another more or less permanent node cane placed.

    I have tested well over 20 IPs. They all give me similar lag.  Cry

    Having other nodes in Thailand wont serve me in any way as they will have the same problem.

    There would need to be some node in Singapore since that's where most of Thai's IPS connects to the backbone. Japan would also be a good place.
    Pages: « 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 [105] 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 ... 862 »
      Print  
Page 104
Viewing Page: 105

IRLBTC™ © 2025 IRLBTC.com