1 2017-06-03 00:37:07 <spunky> Is this an appropriate place to ask high level questions about LN?
 2 2017-06-03 07:10:24 <jonasschnelli> spunky: use #lightning-dev?
 3 2017-06-03 07:19:05 <Michail1> no such channel.
 4 2017-06-03 07:19:21 <Michail1> Well, one person in it.   :p
 5 2017-06-03 07:50:16 <jonasschnelli> Oh.. I though it exists...
 6 2017-06-03 07:50:40 <jonasschnelli> MOVE ONLY
 7 2017-06-03 07:50:44 <jonasschnelli> (oops): https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2015-July/000046.html
 8 2017-06-03 07:54:37 <arubi> it does exist, I'm on there now
 9 2017-06-03 07:54:59 <arubi> Channel #lightning-dev modes: +t
10 2017-06-03 07:55:45 <arubi> also pretty funny, Channel #lightning-dev created on Sun Oct 24 14:07:53 2004
11 2017-06-03 07:56:33 <arubi> there's also #lnd
12 2017-06-03 15:17:41 <petrkr> yo
13 2017-06-03 15:17:58 <petrkr> something happend on blockchain ? AcceptBlockHeader: block 000000000000000001783dc97a74d75da7f21ebe07d896bb7b43d9b9971eecf0 is marked invalid
14 2017-06-03 15:27:02 <arubi> petrkr, try `bitcoin-cli reconsiderblock 000000000000000001783dc97a74d75da7f21ebe07d896bb7b43d9b9971eecf0` ?
15 2017-06-03 15:31:28 <petrkr> 2017-06-03 15:30:47 ERROR: ConnectTip(): ConnectBlock 000000000000000001783dc97a74d75da7f21ebe07d896bb7b43d9b9971eecf0 failed
16 2017-06-03 15:31:28 <petrkr> 2017-06-03 15:30:47 InvalidChainFound:  current best=00000000000000000036a5c8eab437a786dcaa26e2ee038882e4deddec5e957d  height=469508  log2_work=86.534122  date=2017-06-03 07:50:30
17 2017-06-03 15:31:28 <petrkr> 2017-06-03 15:30:47 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=000000000000000001783dc97a74d75da7f21ebe07d896bb7b43d9b9971eecf0  height=469509  log2_work=86.534155  date=2017-06-03 07:50:47
18 2017-06-03 15:32:29 <petrkr> https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000000036a5c8eab437a786dcaa26e2ee038882e4deddec5e957d
19 2017-06-03 15:32:34 <petrkr> https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000001783dc97a74d75da7f21ebe07d896bb7b43d9b9971eecf0
20 2017-06-03 15:32:44 <petrkr> in blockchain info it says it is right block
21 2017-06-03 15:32:50 <arubi> I know they are
22 2017-06-03 15:33:14 <petrkr> but by DB think it is not... solution like re-index all blockchain I do not wanna do right now
23 2017-06-03 15:33:15 <arubi> I'd try running memtest and hard drive SMART test.  if both pass with no errors, maybe worth to open an issue on github and attach debug.log
24 2017-06-03 15:33:42 <arubi> which version are you running by the way?
25 2017-06-03 15:34:30 <petrkr> that "server" is right now 120km from me, can not run anything, but yes, that could be, because old motherboard die so I replaced other with lower RAM and kernel sometims kills random processes, so it could mess DB -- that mean, is there any chance to recover some older DB?
26 2017-06-03 15:34:47 <petrkr> I run now 14.1, first what I thought was update to latest version
27 2017-06-03 15:34:57 <petrkr> before I ran 14.0
28 2017-06-03 15:35:43 <arubi> it's latest, yes.  I'm not sure that even if bitcoind is killed, that the DB should fail
29 2017-06-03 15:36:00 <petrkr> sometimes fail sometimes do reorg
30 2017-06-03 15:36:29 <arubi> so really hard to tell if something is recoverable or not.  probably best to back up the wallet now again if you didn't before
31 2017-06-03 15:36:42 <petrkr> but now I check dmesg, and no bitcoind was killed
32 2017-06-03 15:36:59 <petrkr> wallet is fine, just DB seems to be broken
33 2017-06-03 15:37:23 <arubi> my suggestion is hardware tests.  these failures don't just happen with the software
34 2017-06-03 15:37:25 <petrkr> and wallet is backuped and already imported to other PC, so that I am not afraid of
35 2017-06-03 15:37:32 <arubi> good!
36 2017-06-03 15:37:55 <petrkr> if you know about some cheap good server (tower style)  i would buy
37 2017-06-03 15:38:02 <petrkr> this I have just backup and seems not good
38 2017-06-03 15:38:53 <petrkr> I just wonder if that error from bittcoin is not some known one, so if not, maybe HW problem, thx
39 2017-06-03 15:39:14 <arubi> np.  I used Contabo for a while.  they were pretty good
40 2017-06-03 15:40:06 <petrkr> I need HW one, because I have connected some sensors to it like thermometer and so
41 2017-06-03 15:40:47 <petrkr> and also still space in cloud is so expensive (per month) so it is more cheaper buy 2x2TB drive and do in raid-1 at home for electrics
42 2017-06-03 15:40:48 <arubi> I rented a hardware unit from them, but really didn't ask about arriving on location :)
43 2017-06-03 15:41:00 <arubi> oh yes, now I have everything at home
44 2017-06-03 15:41:25 <arubi> I just use whatever.  my needs aren't very demanding
45 2017-06-03 15:42:01 <petrkr> my request is just run bitcoin+electrum fuill node, that is so RAM consuming, and seems 2GB is not much now
46 2017-06-03 15:42:33 <petrkr> before I had 3.5G that was fine, but that motherboard died (capacitors get high and random freezes occurred)
47 2017-06-03 15:42:40 <arubi> maybe look at electrumx for electrum server.  I read that it's more efficient
48 2017-06-03 15:42:45 <petrkr> I use that
49 2017-06-03 15:42:49 <arubi> oh okay
50 2017-06-03 15:43:16 <petrkr> but now bitcoin node freezed at sync
51 2017-06-03 15:43:30 <arubi> ouch
52 2017-06-03 15:43:33 <petrkr> in that block which can not verify
53 2017-06-03 17:19:06 <ProfMac> What is the last version of the standard client that included code to mine the genesis block?
54 2017-06-03 17:43:54 <arubi> was that ever a feature?  anyway, you just need to set prevblock as 0x000.. .  everything else but the merkle root is up to you
55 2017-06-03 17:46:25 <arubi> there's no reason to mine the genesis block really..  it's accepted as valid as a matter of fact.  blocks can't normally be orphan and still be valid :)  validating the pow for the genesis block has the same effect as mining it with a predetermined nonce
56 2017-06-03 17:47:21 <arubi> rather, be orphan /and/ part of the chain at the same time.  genesis' prevblock doesn't exist
57 2017-06-03 23:59:51 <psz> hey guys, I found this thread on bitcoin-dev: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-August/012954.html, any further progress made?