1 2013-03-12 00:00:04 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: 45 minutes?
2 2013-03-12 00:00:04 <phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, an alert should go out, for some reason the warning message disappears after a very short period of time
3 2013-03-12 00:00:51 <K1773R> Luke-Jr: there should be definitely a warning for the 0.8 users, this way solo miners know the problem faster and can downgrade earlier
4 2013-03-12 00:00:53 <Shuro3> so what should 0.7.2 do? Some people are brabbeling about an old blockchain and I've lost the thread a while ago
5 2013-03-12 00:01:02 <holorga> btw, people, email http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=30587843 recommending "Immediate solution is upgrading to 0.8" is circulating fast, maybe update this info if you are reverting to 0.7
6 2013-03-12 00:01:13 <gyver> Damn, I'm glad I scripted my rigs configuration, everything on BTCGuild
7 2013-03-12 00:01:13 <sipa> holorga: i'm sending a follow-up
8 2013-03-12 00:01:31 <Eleuthria> Almost got one stratum node moved
9 2013-03-12 00:01:33 <Luke-Jr> does anyone have a way to reach slush?
10 2013-03-12 00:01:35 <con__> .7.2 is the last good?
11 2013-03-12 00:01:37 <Shaded> gavinandresen: Can we get an official response to broadcast to the community?
12 2013-03-12 00:01:38 <Eleuthria> Then the next 2 will take another 20 minutes or so
13 2013-03-12 00:01:42 <piuk> for 0.7 i guess dp.cpp: dbenv.set_lk_max_locks() needs increasing?
14 2013-03-12 00:01:45 <JWU42> send hashes to btcguild one E is on 0.7 ?
15 2013-03-12 00:01:46 <Eleuthria> Luke: At least one of slush's nodes is on pre-0.8
16 2013-03-12 00:01:50 <jrmithdobbs> piuk: no
17 2013-03-12 00:01:51 <Eleuthria> He has the last block on the 0.7 chain
18 2013-03-12 00:01:52 <gmaxwell> piuk: do not increase it.
19 2013-03-12 00:01:53 <gavinandresen> working on alert now???
20 2013-03-12 00:01:54 <jrmithdobbs> piuk: no no no
21 2013-03-12 00:01:55 <K1773R> So which pool is ATM running with 0.7, Eligius?
22 2013-03-12 00:02:17 <piuk> why?
23 2013-03-12 00:02:19 <kanoi> ACTION is still running 0.7.0 but getting DB exceptions - current block shows 225435
24 2013-03-12 00:02:30 <Shaded> Luke-Jr: Sent him a message on skype.
25 2013-03-12 00:02:32 <gwillen> so, will all 0.7.x nodes run out of lock entries deterministically on the same set of blocks?
26 2013-03-12 00:02:35 <randy-waterhouse> so now we can stop SatoshiDICE ... how convenient
27 2013-03-12 00:02:36 <schmoe> so what??s the worst case scenario of this? i mean not for the value in $ but for the system?
28 2013-03-12 00:02:41 <gwillen> Assuming not, this means there is still fork potential, right?
29 2013-03-12 00:02:42 <Shaded> Luke-Jr: I'll ring him in 5 mins if he hasn't tesponded
30 2013-03-12 00:02:50 <Luke-Jr> Shaded: thx
31 2013-03-12 00:02:57 <jrmithdobbs> piuk: if you aren't running something that consists of a large % of the network's hash power you should do *nothing* right now, unless you have .8 nodes in which case you may want to shut them down for 30ish min
32 2013-03-12 00:02:57 <K1773R> schmoe: 0.8 chain will be invalidated, the faster its down the less harm
33 2013-03-12 00:03:11 <gmaxwell> Making 0.7 compatible with 0.8 just make it problematic too. This is a hardfork. We need to get consistency with a chain accepted by the least common denominator.
34 2013-03-12 00:03:19 <gwillen> (this seems to suggest that if a miner encounters an unexpected condition while processing a block, it is neither safe to accept it nor to reject it.)
35 2013-03-12 00:03:25 <Shaded> Luke-Jr: Can you get pieter to rescind his message saying to upgrade to 0.8
36 2013-03-12 00:03:41 <Eleuthria> ************************ EXCEPTION: 11DbException Db::get: Cannot allocate memory bitcoin in ProcessMessage()
37 2013-03-12 00:03:42 <Shaded> We need a unified action plan here
38 2013-03-12 00:03:44 <sipa> Shaded: i am Pieter, and have just replied to myself
39 2013-03-12 00:03:45 <Eleuthria> Is filling the logs on my 0.8 nodes
40 2013-03-12 00:03:49 <Shaded> sipa: Thank you
41 2013-03-12 00:03:52 <thermoman> do the 0.7 nodes stuck on block 225435 have to do anythinig?
42 2013-03-12 00:03:55 <Graet> so we are going back to limited blocksizes and 3k+ unconfirmed txns queing up?
43 2013-03-12 00:03:55 <Shaded> I forgot your IRC username :)
44 2013-03-12 00:03:56 <sipa> thermoman: no
45 2013-03-12 00:03:58 <jrmithdobbs> thermoman: just wait
46 2013-03-12 00:04:04 <gmaxwell> thermoman: Just wait.
47 2013-03-12 00:04:16 <thermoman> ok
48 2013-03-12 00:04:21 <KuDeTa> Would someone mind telling me if the problem has been indentified and if so, what it was? I've got various worried people asking me what the matter is. A quick message would go a long way.
49 2013-03-12 00:04:22 <Eleuthria> err
50 2013-03-12 00:04:24 <Eleuthria> my pre 0.8 nodes
51 2013-03-12 00:04:28 <Eleuthria> ************************ EXCEPTION: 11DbException Db::get: Cannot allocate memory bitcoin in ProcessMessage() - nonstop
52 2013-03-12 00:04:38 <sipa> Eleuthria: and that kills the nodes?
53 2013-03-12 00:04:42 <K1773R> KuDeTa, please read the history
54 2013-03-12 00:04:48 <lianj> KuDeTa: not really, right now its more targeted for a solution
55 2013-03-12 00:04:50 <kanoi> as a single user I've only got a few in the last 2 hours on 2x0.7.0
56 2013-03-12 00:04:51 <Eleuthria> Doesn't seem to kill the node
57 2013-03-12 00:04:55 <Eleuthria> Just filling the logs
58 2013-03-12 00:04:57 <sipa> Eleuthria: ok
59 2013-03-12 00:05:03 <thermoman> KuDeTa: 0.7 and 0.8 clients diverged with each having a different block chain because 0.7 clients didn't accept 0.8 blocks from a certain point on
60 2013-03-12 00:05:04 <gwillen> KuDeTa: I am not a canonical source, but it appears to me that the problem is that a bug in 0.7 is triggered on blocks with many transactions
61 2013-03-12 00:05:07 <kanoi> (yes it keeps running)
62 2013-03-12 00:05:12 <Shaded> KuDeTa: I sent you a short summary
63 2013-03-12 00:05:12 <sipa> Eleuthria: are you creating work?
64 2013-03-12 00:05:20 <DBordello> And we are going to try to catch 0.70 up?
65 2013-03-12 00:05:23 <gwillen> KuDeTa: This is bad because the bug causes 0.7 clients to reject the blocks while 0.8 clients accept them.
66 2013-03-12 00:05:33 <gwillen> DBordello: that appears to be the case.
67 2013-03-12 00:05:36 <K1773R> DBordello, 0.8 chain will be invalidated
68 2013-03-12 00:05:45 <DBordello> Okay
69 2013-03-12 00:06:00 <lianj> .8 at 225441 now
70 2013-03-12 00:06:13 <K1773R> 225442
71 2013-03-12 00:06:13 <lianj> .7 must get faster :P
72 2013-03-12 00:06:16 <kanoi> 0.7 at 225435
73 2013-03-12 00:06:17 <Shuro3> So the 0.7 fork (225435) is going to be the main fork
74 2013-03-12 00:06:22 <jgarzik> Shuro3: yes
75 2013-03-12 00:06:26 <K1773R> Shuro3, yes
76 2013-03-12 00:06:31 <GMP> 0.5 at 225442
77 2013-03-12 00:06:35 <thermoman> should 0.7 clients ignore the "Lock table is out of available lock entries" errors from 1-2 hours ago or should these clients be restarted?
78 2013-03-12 00:06:40 <DBordello> Did we get most of the pools over to 0.7
79 2013-03-12 00:06:44 <jgarzik> GMP: really? That is quite interesting.
80 2013-03-12 00:06:46 <K1773R> thermoman, let em running
81 2013-03-12 00:06:46 <KuDeTa> Shaded gwillen thermoman thanks very much. Thanks for your work and good luck.
82 2013-03-12 00:06:50 <sipa> thermoman: ignore
83 2013-03-12 00:06:54 <thermoman> ok
84 2013-03-12 00:06:55 <Eleuthria> wait
85 2013-03-12 00:06:56 <GMP> 0.5 at 225443
86 2013-03-12 00:07:00 <Eleuthria> !
87 2013-03-12 00:07:00 <K1773R> DBordello, being worked on
88 2013-03-12 00:07:01 <gavinandresen> Somebody sanity check: https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5139421
89 2013-03-12 00:07:02 <Shaded> Has anyone identified any double spend attacks yet?
90 2013-03-12 00:07:06 <Luke-Jr> !
91 2013-03-12 00:07:12 <Eleuthria> 0.5 isn't broken?
92 2013-03-12 00:07:19 <sipa> Eleuthria: wait, what?
93 2013-03-12 00:07:20 <K1773R> Shaded, wrong place, this is OffTopic
94 2013-03-12 00:07:22 <gavinandresen> alert params set to relay for 15 minutes, expire after 4 hours
95 2013-03-12 00:07:27 <Luke-Jr> either way, 0.7 is LCD
96 2013-03-12 00:07:36 <randy-waterhouse> can i downgrade a 0.8 chain to a 0.7 chain?
97 2013-03-12 00:07:37 <GMP> Eleuthria: 0.5 fine
98 2013-03-12 00:07:45 <jgarzik> sipa: ^
99 2013-03-12 00:07:54 <thermoman> Luke-Jr: LCD?
100 2013-03-12 00:07:55 <gwillen> gavinandresen: you may wish to provide a url for more information
101 2013-03-12 00:08:00 <thermoman> ah ok got it Luke-Jr
102 2013-03-12 00:08:03 <gwillen> gavinandresen: or a reference to a channel or something
103 2013-03-12 00:08:04 <thermoman> least common dominator
104 2013-03-12 00:08:05 <sipa> Eleuthria: 0.5 should (as in: i expect it to) behave the same as 0.8
105 2013-03-12 00:08:07 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: really should say to ignore confirms???
106 2013-03-12 00:08:11 <K1773R> randy-waterhouse, if you didnt delete the old blockchain files in .bitcoin, yes
107 2013-03-12 00:08:17 <sipa> Eleuthria: eh, as 0.7 !!!
108 2013-03-12 00:08:21 <randy-waterhouse> K1773R: thnaks
109 2013-03-12 00:08:25 <[269]gbg> if .7 is stuck, isn't .8 longer and more 'valid'?
110 2013-03-12 00:08:25 <K1773R> yw
111 2013-03-12 00:08:29 <GMP> 0.5 at 225444
112 2013-03-12 00:08:35 <gavinandresen> Luke-Jr: ? any transactions will be broadcast to both chains, this is not a network split
113 2013-03-12 00:08:40 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ACK, or limit block size...
114 2013-03-12 00:08:42 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: unless someone is double spending
115 2013-03-12 00:08:44 <jrmithdobbs> [269]gbg: now? yes. in an hour? no it wont be
116 2013-03-12 00:08:54 <[269]gbg> k, thx
117 2013-03-12 00:08:56 <jrmithdobbs> [269]gbg: just hold on a bit
118 2013-03-12 00:08:58 <defunctzombie> is there a problem with the blockchain?
119 2013-03-12 00:09:00 <K1773R> randy-waterhouse, maybe u would have to delete the database and the __db too if u get in trouble
120 2013-03-12 00:09:01 <neofutur> so the decision is clearly to downgrade to 0.7 ?
121 2013-03-12 00:09:06 <jrmithdobbs> defunctzombie: yes, just wait, it's being sorted
122 2013-03-12 00:09:07 <defunctzombie> I am seeing more blocks on my 0.7 client than I am on blockchain.info
123 2013-03-12 00:09:10 <neofutur> thats why we should nnoucne everywhere ?
124 2013-03-12 00:09:13 <K1773R> defunctzombie, wait pls
125 2013-03-12 00:09:14 <neofutur> cler answer needed
126 2013-03-12 00:09:19 <etotheipi_> haha, there needs to be a hidden IRC channel for this kind of thing
127 2013-03-12 00:09:19 <jrmithdobbs> defunctzombie: unless you control a large % of hash power you need to do nothing at all right this moment
128 2013-03-12 00:09:21 <sipa> Eleuthria: can you confirm that 0.5 behaves the same as 0.7?
129 2013-03-12 00:09:26 <defunctzombie> I run bitfloor, do I need to take any action?
130 2013-03-12 00:09:29 <neofutur> thats what we should announce everywhere ?
131 2013-03-12 00:09:30 <Eleuthria> sipa: GMP is the one posting 0.5 is at block 225444
132 2013-03-12 00:09:33 <defunctzombie> should I pause funds in/out?
133 2013-03-12 00:09:34 <sipa> defunctzombie: which bitcoind are you on?
134 2013-03-12 00:09:35 <jgarzik> defunctzombie: stop importing blocks
135 2013-03-12 00:09:37 <defunctzombie> 0.7
136 2013-03-12 00:09:39 <K1773R> etotheipi_, i suggested the OPs to kick+ban ppls who do OffTopic now
137 2013-03-12 00:09:41 <Eleuthria> I don't have a 0.5 node
138 2013-03-12 00:09:41 <Shaded> defunctzombie: Yes, pause txns
139 2013-03-12 00:09:43 <Luke-Jr> GMP: what 0.5.x version?
140 2013-03-12 00:09:46 <defunctzombie> ok, will do
141 2013-03-12 00:09:48 <jrmithdobbs> defunctzombie: stop accepting anything for right now
142 2013-03-12 00:09:57 <jrmithdobbs> <3
143 2013-03-12 00:10:08 <GMP> 0.5.0.1-beta
144 2013-03-12 00:10:28 <Luke-Jr> GMP: official binaries, or custom build?
145 2013-03-12 00:10:34 <GMP> custom
146 2013-03-12 00:10:39 <Luke-Jr> GMP: bdb 4.8 or newer?
147 2013-03-12 00:10:47 <kanoi> only other important question :) How far back is the fork? :)
148 2013-03-12 00:10:50 <Vinnie_win> kudeta: Minor bug, it's being handled. Go to sleep and when you wake up all will be well.
149 2013-03-12 00:10:53 <lianj> .7 still at 225435? oO
150 2013-03-12 00:10:57 <neofutur> fyi all https://support.mtgox.com/entries/21477395-Bitcoin-blockchain-issue-bitcoin-deposits-temporarily-suspended
151 2013-03-12 00:11:19 <K1773R> kanoi, https://coinbase.com/network/blocks
152 2013-03-12 00:11:19 <kanoi> 0.7 225435 = 000000000000027373b3fa7b123ca461e5c5d090c9caeb24a8bbbd32e1eaaa5d
153 2013-03-12 00:11:23 <defunctzombie> I have paused all tx at bitfloor
154 2013-03-12 00:11:33 <defunctzombie> will wait for confirmation that we think things are resolved
155 2013-03-12 00:11:39 <fabrizziop> should I panic?
156 2013-03-12 00:11:42 <con__> yes
157 2013-03-12 00:11:44 <moartr4dez> yes, panic!
158 2013-03-12 00:11:46 <con__> get in line tho
159 2013-03-12 00:11:46 <etotheipi_> lol, no
160 2013-03-12 00:11:47 <Vinnie_win> fabrizziop: No don't panic
161 2013-03-12 00:11:50 <gwillen> no, and please keep offtopic chat out of this channel
162 2013-03-12 00:11:52 <neofutur> so the decision is clearly to downgrade to 0.7 ? thats what we should announce everywhere ?
163 2013-03-12 00:11:56 <lianj> fabrizziop: at least not msg spam here
164 2013-03-12 00:11:58 <moartr4dez> Don't worry - I will buy you bitcoin for... lesse... $10!
165 2013-03-12 00:12:02 <Luke-Jr> neofutur: probably best to clarify the linked solution is outdated
166 2013-03-12 00:12:02 <moartr4dez> your*
167 2013-03-12 00:12:09 <jgarzik> OK, offtopic and FAQ will get kicked
168 2013-03-12 00:12:10 <jgarzik> OK, offtopic and FAQ will get kicked
169 2013-03-12 00:12:11 <Luke-Jr> neofutur: only miners need to downgrade, and only temporarily
170 2013-03-12 00:12:12 <etotheipi_> only miners need to downgrade, regular nodes don't need to do anything
171 2013-03-12 00:12:15 <K1773R> sipa: pls kickban OffTopic ppl or move the chat elsewhere, ty
172 2013-03-12 00:12:16 <neofutur> ok
173 2013-03-12 00:12:29 <jouke> But, my .7 client is still stuck.
174 2013-03-12 00:12:32 <gavinandresen> Everybody mining on version 0.8 should stop mining for now. When you start again in a few hours, you should set your maxblocksize to 500k or less.
175 2013-03-12 00:12:39 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ACK
176 2013-03-12 00:12:49 <vbuterin> do we have any idea how much TH/s we have on each version right now?
177 2013-03-12 00:12:57 <sipa> jouke: what is your last block?
178 2013-03-12 00:12:58 <defunctzombie> my 0.7 client did not appear to have issues (I think)
179 2013-03-12 00:13:05 <defunctzombie> not immeidately clear tho
180 2013-03-12 00:13:05 <kanoi> I presume 0.7 isn't stuck just mining with a lot fewer people?
181 2013-03-12 00:13:08 <jouke> still 225429
182 2013-03-12 00:13:22 <jgarzik> defunctzombie: 0.7 will just appear stuck or slow, to users, as it is on a fork
183 2013-03-12 00:13:28 <lianj> gavinandresen: if you have 500k or less? a exact number (published later) would be nice
184 2013-03-12 00:13:29 <sipa> jouke: are you conntect to other 0.7's?
185 2013-03-12 00:13:35 <neofutur> Luke-Jr: thanks for the answer
186 2013-03-12 00:13:40 <jgarzik> lianj: we do not know enough yet
187 2013-03-12 00:13:41 <defunctzombie> jgarzik: will I need to rollback any transactions?
188 2013-03-12 00:13:46 <doublec> my 0.7 pool node is on block 225435. Does that sound like what it should be on?
189 2013-03-12 00:13:47 <MagicalTux> "version" : 70200, "blocks" : 225435,
190 2013-03-12 00:13:50 <phantomcircuit> defunctzombie, you should be seeing a number of warnings about forks
191 2013-03-12 00:13:51 <sipa> doublec: sounds right
192 2013-03-12 00:13:54 <gwillen> Can I ask again: Is the set of blocks which will fail validation due to the 0.7 bug a deterministic set? Or will it differ from client to client?
193 2013-03-12 00:13:55 <Ukto> if the db is up to date, shows latest block, it should be fine, right?
194 2013-03-12 00:13:58 <doublec> ok, thanks
195 2013-03-12 00:14:01 <jgarzik> defunctzombie: unlikely
196 2013-03-12 00:14:04 <lianj> jgarzik: yep, just saying.. anyhow doing great work guys, thank you!
197 2013-03-12 00:14:05 <jon98837> getinfo on 0.7.2 is saying "Warning: Displayed transactions may not be correct! You may need to upgrade, or other nodes may need to upgrade." ...I take it this means it thinks it's out of sync with everyone else and is not happy about it?
198 2013-03-12 00:14:10 <defunctzombie> I am seeing my 0.7 on 225443
199 2013-03-12 00:14:11 <sipa> jouke: yes, expected
200 2013-03-12 00:14:17 <jouke> sipa: a couple
201 2013-03-12 00:14:17 <sipa> eh, jon98837: expected
202 2013-03-12 00:14:18 <defunctzombie> correction 225444
203 2013-03-12 00:14:20 <jrmithdobbs> jon98837: expected
204 2013-03-12 00:14:28 <sipa> jouke: you're not only behind a 0.8 node?
205 2013-03-12 00:14:31 <gmaxwell> jon98837: Just do nothing right now. There is a network wide issue at the moment which will be resolved in time.
206 2013-03-12 00:14:34 <thermoman> ACTION is on 0.7.2 and still 225435
207 2013-03-12 00:14:39 <Eleuthria> 0.8 is 9 blocks ahead now...
208 2013-03-12 00:14:44 <jouke> sipa: not anymore no
209 2013-03-12 00:15:10 <defunctzombie> Eleuthria: what is the current block count?
210 2013-03-12 00:15:11 <surge_> AFTER THE ALERT BTC PRIZE DROPED from 48 to 46$
211 2013-03-12 00:15:12 <kanoi> ok so last same for 0.7 and 0.8 was 225429
212 2013-03-12 00:15:26 <Jezzz> ^
213 2013-03-12 00:15:50 <phantomcircuit> surge_, it actually dropped before
214 2013-03-12 00:16:34 <JWU42> well mt.red shutdown it seems
215 2013-03-12 00:16:49 <JWU42> I believe they just updated to 0.80
216 2013-03-12 00:16:56 <gmaxwell> kanoi: yes, https://coinbase.com/network/blocks/000000000000015c50b165fcdd33556f8b44800c5298943ac70b112df480c023 is a rather large block
217 2013-03-12 00:17:01 <MagicalTux> JWU42: mt.red ?
218 2013-03-12 00:17:07 <JWU42> mining pool
219 2013-03-12 00:17:11 <MagicalTux> ok
220 2013-03-12 00:17:21 <JWU42> no - not Mt Gox ;)
221 2013-03-12 00:17:42 <fabrizziop> so what, I have bitcoin 0.8, so should we downgrade or upgrade?
222 2013-03-12 00:17:52 <gmaxwell> fabrizziop: are you a mining pool?
223 2013-03-12 00:17:58 <jgarzik> fabrizziop: if mining, use 0.7. otherwise, just wait.
224 2013-03-12 00:18:01 <fabrizziop> no, but I mine with slush
225 2013-03-12 00:18:07 <JWU42> I _think_ as long as you aren't mining it is OK to keep running 0.8
226 2013-03-12 00:18:09 <gmaxwell> JWU42: Tell them not to do that, or they're going to get their blocks orphaned...
227 2013-03-12 00:18:21 <sipa> gmaxwell, jgarzik: advice for merchants should be to stop processing until the chains converge
228 2013-03-12 00:18:23 <con__> but will the .7 clients not invalidate the blocks generated on .8 after that?
229 2013-03-12 00:18:28 <defunctzombie> will there be an announcement about the "real" best block and hash once this stabilizes?
230 2013-03-12 00:18:29 <Luke-Jr> fabrizziop: use getwork
231 2013-03-12 00:18:32 <jgarzik> sipa: ACK
232 2013-03-12 00:18:35 <gmaxwell> sipa: I've been telling people that, yes.
233 2013-03-12 00:18:37 <JWU42> gmaxwell: I don't have a direct line to RR - but did post on the forums gavin's message
234 2013-03-12 00:18:38 <sipa> i don't want this made worse by someone doing a 6-block long double spend
235 2013-03-12 00:18:50 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ^
236 2013-03-12 00:19:03 <kanoi> con__ yes it's forked back at 225429 0.7 one fork 0.8 another
237 2013-03-12 00:19:04 <defunctzombie> MagicalTux: what is the plan to turn tx back on? I have disabled mine as of now.
238 2013-03-12 00:19:13 <MagicalTux> defunctzombie: see https://support.mtgox.com/entries/21477395-Bitcoin-blockchain-issue-bitcoin-deposits-temporarily-suspended
239 2013-03-12 00:19:22 <Kiba> you't can reject bitcoin deposit!
240 2013-03-12 00:19:25 <con__> kanoi, which is why I'm asking, what will happen to people running their .8 bitcoinds ?
241 2013-03-12 00:19:27 <Luke-Jr> BitPay frozen
242 2013-03-12 00:19:33 <Shaded> sipa: Most merchants online right now have payments frozen
243 2013-03-12 00:19:38 <sipa> Shaded: good
244 2013-03-12 00:20:06 <jgarzik> Name a 0.7 pool, and I can point the ASIC miner at it.
245 2013-03-12 00:20:12 <gmaxwell> con__: For non-miners they should sit tight, not accept new payments until this is resolved. Their nodes will happily reorg when the other chain overtakes.
246 2013-03-12 00:20:12 <jgarzik> Don't have a local 0.7 ATM
247 2013-03-12 00:20:15 <sipa> con__: 0.8 is fine if you're not mining; 0.8 clients will switch to the 0.7 fork when enough mining power is behind that
248 2013-03-12 00:20:22 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: Eligius :P
249 2013-03-12 00:20:27 <con__> ah k thanks sipa, gmaxwell
250 2013-03-12 00:20:28 <sipa> ACTION turns off his 0.8GH/s on 0.8
251 2013-03-12 00:20:33 <Eleuthria> jgarzik: 50.31.149.57
252 2013-03-12 00:20:34 <Eleuthria> 3333
253 2013-03-12 00:20:37 <defunctzombie> MagicalTux: yea, I saw that. At what point do we go ahead?
254 2013-03-12 00:20:37 <etotheipi_> lol, sipa
255 2013-03-12 00:20:38 <B0g4r7> jgazrik, I hear eligius is OK.
256 2013-03-12 00:20:41 <Eleuthria> shit
257 2013-03-12 00:20:41 <JWU42> sipa: suggestions for where to mine if 0.8 pool is now down ?
258 2013-03-12 00:20:42 <Eleuthria> nevermind
259 2013-03-12 00:20:53 <sipa> JWU42: anything on 0.7
260 2013-03-12 00:20:54 <JWU42> ahh - E that works?
261 2013-03-12 00:20:58 <Eleuthria> oh this is so damn bad.
262 2013-03-12 00:21:09 <DBordello> defunctzombie, I am waiting until the 0.7 chain passes the 0.8 chain
263 2013-03-12 00:21:13 <DBordello> and everybodies clients reorg
264 2013-03-12 00:21:14 <Eleuthria> my stratum interface is disconnecting
265 2013-03-12 00:21:14 <MagicalTux> defunctzombie: once length of 0.7.2 blockchain is > 0.8
266 2013-03-12 00:21:17 <sipa> Eleuthria: i'm sorry for the trouble 0.8 has caused you already
267 2013-03-12 00:21:28 <defunctzombie> DBordello: where are you monitoring this?
268 2013-03-12 00:21:32 <MagicalTux> (actually, length(0.7.2) > length(0.8)+6 may be safer)
269 2013-03-12 00:21:32 <Shaded> Anyone have Brian Armstrong's cell phone number?
270 2013-03-12 00:21:41 <defunctzombie> because my apps tell me the chain is longer than what I see on other sites
271 2013-03-12 00:21:42 <Eleuthria> ~1500 BTC lost in 24 hours from this
272 2013-03-12 00:21:44 <kanoi> Eleuthria should for a rollback before his payout problem :D :D :D
273 2013-03-12 00:21:46 <DBordello> defunctzombie, ./bitcoind getinfo on two nodes
274 2013-03-12 00:21:48 <Eleuthria> the hardfork and the new DB structure in 0.8
275 2013-03-12 00:22:00 <defunctzombie> DBordello: gotcha
276 2013-03-12 00:22:03 <K1773R> Eleuthria, in generall or just ur pool?
277 2013-03-12 00:22:03 <Luke-Jr> Eleuthria: disconnecting?
278 2013-03-12 00:22:12 <defunctzombie> MagicalTux: any thoughts on a trading pause on this?
279 2013-03-12 00:22:12 <Luke-Jr> Shaded: I think I do
280 2013-03-12 00:22:17 <fabrizziop> wait a minute, could you explain exactly what block caused the fork and why?
281 2013-03-12 00:22:23 <lianj> Shaded: coinbase is working on it
282 2013-03-12 00:22:24 <Shaded> Luke-Jr: Give him a ring please
283 2013-03-12 00:22:28 <fabrizziop> I didn't understood correctly
284 2013-03-12 00:22:29 <Shaded> lianj: ok, thanks
285 2013-03-12 00:22:32 <K1773R> no fabrizziop read the history
286 2013-03-12 00:22:34 <MagicalTux> [10:21:45] <defunctzombie> MagicalTux: any thoughts on a trading pause on this? <- considered it, but it doesn't make much difference
287 2013-03-12 00:22:39 <Luke-Jr> calling
288 2013-03-12 00:22:48 <lianj> Shaded: you could join #coinbase
289 2013-03-12 00:22:48 <MagicalTux> hopefully this won't last more than a few hours
290 2013-03-12 00:22:56 <lianj> Shaded: but its already being worked on
291 2013-03-12 00:22:57 <evoorhees> defunctzombie: I do not think trading should stop
292 2013-03-12 00:22:57 <Luke-Jr> oops, see lianj
293 2013-03-12 00:23:04 <defunctzombie> MagicalTux: kk, if you do decide to go ahead, ping me and I will do the same
294 2013-03-12 00:23:12 <defunctzombie> evoorhees: noted :)
295 2013-03-12 00:23:22 <thermoman> clients on 0.7 don't have issues with payments (spent double) or anything like this, right? so a market with bitcoin clients running 0.7.2 just has to sit tight and wait, right?
296 2013-03-12 00:23:23 <Eleuthria> 50.31.149.57:3333 is now on pre-0.8 chain
297 2013-03-12 00:23:24 <fabrizziop> K1773R: nevermind, thanks
298 2013-03-12 00:23:31 <evoorhees> let the market price in the problem, and the solution ;)
299 2013-03-12 00:23:47 <DBordello> 0.7.2 is on 225436 now
300 2013-03-12 00:23:47 <K1773R> fabrizziop, sry but otherwise we have to explain it over and over for everyone
301 2013-03-12 00:23:49 <Eleuthria> about 5 minutes until two more stratum nodes switch to pre-0.8
302 2013-03-12 00:23:56 <DBordello> ;;blocks
303 2013-03-12 00:23:56 <gribble> 225436
304 2013-03-12 00:23:59 <gmaxwell> Eleuthria: thanks.
305 2013-03-12 00:24:11 <B0g4r7> Trading is decoupled from the problem. No reason to suspend.
306 2013-03-12 00:24:14 <moartr4dez> hmm... but if everyone goes back to 0.7 for now, doesn't that mean a rogue 0.8 miner could still trigger the problem again?
307 2013-03-12 00:24:27 <Luke-Jr> moartr4dez: not without 51%
308 2013-03-12 00:24:29 <K1773R> moartr4dez, no, aslong the 0.7 is longer
309 2013-03-12 00:24:30 <con__> only if they get more blocks than everyone else
310 2013-03-12 00:24:32 <jrmithdobbs> moartr4dez: yes, it does
311 2013-03-12 00:24:41 <warren> non-mining 0.8 is ok, or I should shutdown?
312 2013-03-12 00:24:42 <kanoi> 0.7 225435 is slush
313 2013-03-12 00:24:43 <bock> moartr4dez, mayority of miners will be at 0.7, so even if its triggered, it will be orphaned
314 2013-03-12 00:24:47 <yellowhat-2> i just recently joined, how deep was the fork?
315 2013-03-12 00:24:49 <K1773R> warren, mine with 0.7
316 2013-03-12 00:24:54 <jgarzik> non-mining 0.8 is ok
317 2013-03-12 00:24:56 <jgarzik> just wait
318 2013-03-12 00:24:56 <Luke-Jr> warren: just ignore confirms
319 2013-03-12 00:25:01 <kanoi> 0.7 225436 is BTCGuild
320 2013-03-12 00:25:06 <K1773R> warren, but not p2pool, its broken right now
321 2013-03-12 00:25:12 <moartr4dez> jrmithdobbs: that's what I thought - because it's a bug in 0.7 (I'm not concerned about the official blockchain, just disruption to miners)
322 2013-03-12 00:25:13 <jrmithdobbs> moartr4dez: there's more to the fix than just getting the majority of miners on .7
323 2013-03-12 00:25:35 <K1773R> jrmithdobbs, true, but we have to get the majority back to 0.7 first
324 2013-03-12 00:25:36 <jrmithdobbs> moartr4dez: but that part has to happen before fixing .8 will matter, once .8 is patched the scenario you describe should not be possible
325 2013-03-12 00:25:44 <thermoman> 225436 here too on 072
326 2013-03-12 00:25:48 <Shaded> sipa: Any official communication advising merchants yet?
327 2013-03-12 00:26:00 <warren> K1773R: I'm mining the pointless coin anyway.
328 2013-03-12 00:26:02 <Luke-Jr> ACTION ponders who else we need to contact
329 2013-03-12 00:26:05 <jrmithdobbs> Shaded: don't trust any txns confirmed after 225435 for right now
330 2013-03-12 00:26:06 <moartr4dez> sounds good - but miners could still run an unpatched 0.8 - so seems like 0.7 needs patching too?
331 2013-03-12 00:26:09 <K1773R> Shaded, mtgox annunced a halt so yes
332 2013-03-12 00:26:13 <sneak> hi
333 2013-03-12 00:26:17 <thermoman> bitcoin price will drop
334 2013-03-12 00:26:22 <sipa> Shaded: stop processing transactions until the 0.7 chain catches up
335 2013-03-12 00:26:25 <jouke> sipa: ah, my .7 client is catching up, still got an error though.
336 2013-03-12 00:26:25 <Shaded> K1773R: I'm talking a github message or somthing
337 2013-03-12 00:26:39 <K1773R> sneak and thermoman, no OffTopic pls, or you get kicked. ty
338 2013-03-12 00:26:39 <thermoman> jouke: which error?
339 2013-03-12 00:26:49 <sneak> K1773R: uhh, thanks
340 2013-03-12 00:26:49 <thermoman> K1773R: ok
341 2013-03-12 00:26:51 <jrmithdobbs> moartr4dez: no, .7 wont need patching once the chain reconvenes the regression was in .8 due to an oversight in an unintended limitation in the bdb code in .7 (which was removed and replaced in .8)
342 2013-03-12 00:27:01 <K1773R> Shaded, a warning for bitcoind 0.8 is imminent
343 2013-03-12 00:27:16 <phantomcircuit> the ultimate in edge cases
344 2013-03-12 00:27:22 <jrmithdobbs> right
345 2013-03-12 00:27:23 <moartr4dez> ah okay