Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 283 results by akk123
Re: == Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~100 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==
================================================================
when i try 65 bits, i get segmention error. But if i drop the bits to 60 it works fine. I am using Geforce GTX 2070 with ccap 75. Any thoughts please?
https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html#features-and-technical-specifications__technical-specifications-per-compute-capabilitywhen i try 65 bits, i get segmention error. But if i drop the bits to 60 it works fine. I am using Geforce GTX 2070 with ccap 75. Any thoughts please?
Try replacing
#define NB_TRHEAD_PER_GROUP 128
at
#define NB_TRHEAD_PER_GROUP 64
...
[meanjumpsize#64] 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF(now) <= 40A3D5640000000(optimal) <= 7E07E07E07E07E0(next)
[meanjumpsize#64] 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF(now) <= 40A3D5640000000(optimal) <= 7E07E07E07E07E0(next)
Sp[64]|J-----------------------------------------------------------|Sp[65]
this Sp set has low efficiency (over -25%) for this mean jumpsize
[JmaxofSp] Sp[64]=3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
Old DPmodule: 2^30
New DPmodule: 2^24
[DPmodule] 2^24 = 16777216 (0x0000000001000000)
dT[0] 0x 1C1D549AF46361B4B
dT[1] 0x-6F51C29AFFFFFFFFEF66E09BFFFFFFFF6F33A29CFFFFFFFFEF48C09DFFFFFFFDAD4038EFB9C9E4B5
dT[2] 0x215C7ACA0000000021323EC8000000012198BAC600000000216E7EC400000002E3AA447146361 B4B
dT[3] 0x-4DF547D0FFFFFFFFCE34A1D3FFFFFFFE4D9AE7D6FFFFFFFFCDDA41D9FFFFFFFC8B6B3E2DB9C9E4B5
dT[4] 0x42B8F5940000000042647D90000000024331758C0000000042DCFD8800000004057F3F3346361 B4B
dT[5] 0x-2C98CD06FFFFFFFFAD02630BFFFFFFFD2C022D10FFFFFFFFAC6BC315FFFFFFFB6996436BB9C9E4B5
...
Hi thanks for the reply. I tried your suggestion but result is the same. When I increase verbose output though, numbers where the jumpsizes calculated goes drasticly high.
Re: == Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~100 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==
"./vs-kangaroo-hybrid -v 1 -gpu -p 8 -bits 65 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"
[###########################################################]
[# Pollard-kangaroo PrivKey Recovery Tool #]
[# (based on engine of VanitySearch 1.15) #]
[# bitcoin ecdsa secp256k1 #]
[# ver 0.01 GPU Hybrid v4F #]
[# GPU implementation changes by alek76 #]
[# Tips: 1NULY7DhzuNvSDtPkFzNo6oRTZQWBqXNE9 #]
[###########################################################]
[DATE(utc)] 07 Apr 2020 16:03:05
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pow2bits] 65
[Wsqrt] (2^32) 100000000
[M] 18000000000000000
[rangeW] 2^64..2^65 ; W = U - L = 2^64
[DPsize] 1048576 (hashtable size)
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pubkey#65] loaded
[Xcoordinate] 30210C23B1A047BC9BDBB13448E67DEDDC108946DE6DE639BCC75D47C0216B1B
[Ycoordinate] E383C4A8ED4FAC77C0D2AD737D8499A362F483F8FE39D1E86AAED578A9455DFC
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] 40A3D5640000000
[meanjumpsize#64] 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF(now) <= 40A3D5640000000(optimal) <= 7E07E07E07E07E0(next)
Sp[64]|J-----------------------------------------------------------|Sp[65]
this Sp set has low efficiency (over -25%) for this mean jumpsize
[JmaxofSp] Sp[64]=3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
Old DPmodule: 2^30
New DPmodule: 2^24
[DPmodule] 2^24 = 16777216 (0x0000000001000000)
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
=======================================================================================
"./vs-kangaroo-hybrid -v 1 -gpu -p 8 -bits 60 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"
[###########################################################]
[# Pollard-kangaroo PrivKey Recovery Tool #]
[# (based on engine of VanitySearch 1.15) #]
[# bitcoin ecdsa secp256k1 #]
[# ver 0.01 GPU Hybrid v4F #]
[# GPU implementation changes by alek76 #]
[# Tips: 1NULY7DhzuNvSDtPkFzNo6oRTZQWBqXNE9 #]
[###########################################################]
[DATE(utc)] 07 Apr 2020 16:04:03
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pow2bits] 60
[Wsqrt] (2^29) 40000000
[M] C00000000000000
[rangeW] 2^59..2^60 ; W = U - L = 2^59
[DPsize] 1048576 (hashtable size)
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pubkey#60] loaded
[Xcoordinate] 30210C23B1A047BC9BDBB13448E67DEDDC108946DE6DE639BCC75D47C0216B1B
[Ycoordinate] E383C4A8ED4FAC77C0D2AD737D8499A362F483F8FE39D1E86AAED578A9455DFC
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] FFFFFFFF90474C540000000
[meanjumpsize#99] 14AFD6A052BF5A814AFD6A05(now) <= FFFFFFFF90474C540000000(optimal) <= 28F5C28F5C28F5C28F5C28F5(next)
Sp[98]|--------------------------------J---------------------------|Sp[99]
this Sp set has low efficiency (over -25%) for this mean jumpsize
[JmaxofSp] Sp[99]=A72F05397829CBC14E5E0A7 nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
Old DPmodule: 2^27
New DPmodule: 2^24
[DPmodule] 2^24 = 16777216 (0x0000000001000000)
[GPU] threads: 1 Hang on to your hats... ;-)
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] 20000000
[meanjumpsize#34] 1E1E1E1E(now) <= 20000000(optimal) <= 3A83A83A(next)
Sp[34]|
[JmaxofSp] Sp[34]=1E1E1E1E nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
GPUEngine: DPmodule: 0x80000 2^19 ((pow2W-(2*Power))/2)-2 Hop_modulo: 42 Power: 8
Comparator time: 0.096 msec wild.txt 0 bytes tame.txt 0 bytes
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
GPU Bits: 60
GPU Tame Points: [M] + Rand(pow2W-0)
GPU Tame Starting Key 0: C00000000000000
GPU Tame Starting Key 1: FD6EBA8700D43D6
GPU Tame Starting Key 2: EF256D34DF0F066
GPU Tame Starting Key 3: FECD34BB117744E
GPU Tame Starting Key 4: F16585F78ED824A
GPU Tame Starting Key 5: 103C4C7792D706BF
GPU Tame Starting Key 6: C9A60703286D1D3
GPU Tame Starting Key 7: E4B284A08B685B5
GPU Tame Starting Key 8: 119EC31B0FD3A92C
GPU Tame Starting Key 9: 129127EDA0A93B0D
GPU Tame Starting Key 36863: C48796513E6E740 Thread: 36864
GPU Wild Points: [Target] + Rand(pow2W-1)
GPU Wild Starting Key 0: 1E6E49D99F9DC8E
GPU Wild Starting Key 1: 226EEF6F0322D16
GPU Wild Starting Key 2: 42181FB9E05544
GPU Wild Starting Key 3: F9B35DB4EE3271
GPU Wild Starting Key 4: 3299DF1FB83662C
GPU Wild Starting Key 5: 16D2A850419D5DD
GPU Wild Starting Key 6: BF9DF03FA141FF
GPU Wild Starting Key 7: 72276908E77B1C
GPU Wild Starting Key 8: C90C14D17D82A5
GPU Wild Starting Key 9: 2287AD8FA7CFA6
GPU Wild Starting Key 36863: 3DE7973035E4479 Thread: 36864
Used Comparator in C++^C
================================================================
when i try 65 bits, i get segmention error. But if i drop the bits to 60 it works fine. I am using Geforce GTX 2070 with ccap 75. Any thoughts please?
[###########################################################]
[# Pollard-kangaroo PrivKey Recovery Tool #]
[# (based on engine of VanitySearch 1.15) #]
[# bitcoin ecdsa secp256k1 #]
[# ver 0.01 GPU Hybrid v4F #]
[# GPU implementation changes by alek76 #]
[# Tips: 1NULY7DhzuNvSDtPkFzNo6oRTZQWBqXNE9 #]
[###########################################################]
[DATE(utc)] 07 Apr 2020 16:03:05
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pow2bits] 65
[Wsqrt] (2^32) 100000000
[M] 18000000000000000
[rangeW] 2^64..2^65 ; W = U - L = 2^64
[DPsize] 1048576 (hashtable size)
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pubkey#65] loaded
[Xcoordinate] 30210C23B1A047BC9BDBB13448E67DEDDC108946DE6DE639BCC75D47C0216B1B
[Ycoordinate] E383C4A8ED4FAC77C0D2AD737D8499A362F483F8FE39D1E86AAED578A9455DFC
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
- Sp-table of pow2 points - ready [~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] 40A3D5640000000
[meanjumpsize#64] 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF(now) <= 40A3D5640000000(optimal) <= 7E07E07E07E07E0(next)
Sp[64]|J-----------------------------------------------------------|Sp[65]
this Sp set has low efficiency (over -25%) for this mean jumpsize
[JmaxofSp] Sp[64]=3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
Old DPmodule: 2^30
New DPmodule: 2^24
[DPmodule] 2^24 = 16777216 (0x0000000001000000)
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
=======================================================================================
"./vs-kangaroo-hybrid -v 1 -gpu -p 8 -bits 60 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"
[###########################################################]
[# Pollard-kangaroo PrivKey Recovery Tool #]
[# (based on engine of VanitySearch 1.15) #]
[# bitcoin ecdsa secp256k1 #]
[# ver 0.01 GPU Hybrid v4F #]
[# GPU implementation changes by alek76 #]
[# Tips: 1NULY7DhzuNvSDtPkFzNo6oRTZQWBqXNE9 #]
[###########################################################]
[DATE(utc)] 07 Apr 2020 16:04:03
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pow2bits] 60
[Wsqrt] (2^29) 40000000
[M] C00000000000000
[rangeW] 2^59..2^60 ; W = U - L = 2^59
[DPsize] 1048576 (hashtable size)
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[pubkey#60] loaded
[Xcoordinate] 30210C23B1A047BC9BDBB13448E67DEDDC108946DE6DE639BCC75D47C0216B1B
[Ycoordinate] E383C4A8ED4FAC77C0D2AD737D8499A362F483F8FE39D1E86AAED578A9455DFC
[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
- Sp-table of pow2 points - ready [~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] FFFFFFFF90474C540000000
[meanjumpsize#99] 14AFD6A052BF5A814AFD6A05(now) <= FFFFFFFF90474C540000000(optimal) <= 28F5C28F5C28F5C28F5C28F5(next)
Sp[98]|--------------------------------J---------------------------|Sp[99]
this Sp set has low efficiency (over -25%) for this mean jumpsize
[JmaxofSp] Sp[99]=A72F05397829CBC14E5E0A7 nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
Old DPmodule: 2^27
New DPmodule: 2^24
[DPmodule] 2^24 = 16777216 (0x0000000001000000)
- -1874375596T+0W kangaroos - ready
[GPU] threads: 1 Hang on to your hats... ;-)
[optimal_mean_jumpsize] 20000000
[meanjumpsize#34] 1E1E1E1E(now) <= 20000000(optimal) <= 3A83A83A(next)
Sp[34]|
- Runing Comparator every: 29 sec
[JmaxofSp] Sp[34]=1E1E1E1E nearer to optimal mean jumpsize of Sp set
GPUEngine: DPmodule: 0x80000 2^19 ((pow2W-(2*Power))/2)-2 Hop_modulo: 42 Power: 8
Comparator time: 0.096 msec wild.txt 0 bytes tame.txt 0 bytes
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
GPU Bits: 60
GPU Tame Points: [M] + Rand(pow2W-0)
GPU Tame Starting Key 0: C00000000000000
GPU Tame Starting Key 1: FD6EBA8700D43D6
GPU Tame Starting Key 2: EF256D34DF0F066
GPU Tame Starting Key 3: FECD34BB117744E
GPU Tame Starting Key 4: F16585F78ED824A
GPU Tame Starting Key 5: 103C4C7792D706BF
GPU Tame Starting Key 6: C9A60703286D1D3
GPU Tame Starting Key 7: E4B284A08B685B5
GPU Tame Starting Key 8: 119EC31B0FD3A92C
GPU Tame Starting Key 9: 129127EDA0A93B0D
GPU Tame Starting Key 36863: C48796513E6E740 Thread: 36864
GPU Wild Points: [Target] + Rand(pow2W-1)
GPU Wild Starting Key 0: 1E6E49D99F9DC8E
GPU Wild Starting Key 1: 226EEF6F0322D16
GPU Wild Starting Key 2: 42181FB9E05544
GPU Wild Starting Key 3: F9B35DB4EE3271
GPU Wild Starting Key 4: 3299DF1FB83662C
GPU Wild Starting Key 5: 16D2A850419D5DD
GPU Wild Starting Key 6: BF9DF03FA141FF
GPU Wild Starting Key 7: 72276908E77B1C
GPU Wild Starting Key 8: C90C14D17D82A5
GPU Wild Starting Key 9: 2287AD8FA7CFA6
GPU Wild Starting Key 36863: 3DE7973035E4479 Thread: 36864
Used Comparator in C++^C
================================================================
when i try 65 bits, i get segmention error. But if i drop the bits to 60 it works fine. I am using Geforce GTX 2070 with ccap 75. Any thoughts please?
Re: [AIRDROP][ICO] LOTTEREUM - planned reduction in the number of tokens in turnover
CONDITIONS AIRDROP
When the contract is deployed to the Eth addresses, which will be registered in it, 1000 tokens will be credited.
Did you deploy the contract to Eth addresses that you collected? if so where is this free tokens?
When the contract is deployed to the Eth addresses, which will be registered in it, 1000 tokens will be credited.
Did you deploy the contract to Eth addresses that you collected? if so where is this free tokens?
Hey rico666, Are you Evil-Knievel by chance?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159191
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159191
Re: [ANN] [VIA] ★ Viacoin ★ ~ the future of digital currency ~ ★
Nice job Romano! Many good quotes!
For the lazy people these are his contributions:
What we are seeing is a stalling tactic from miners, Viacoin lead developer Romano told Bitcoin Magazine. They know that if SegWit activates on altcoins, it will make blocking it on Bitcoin even less credible.
SegWit signaling will start soon on Viacoin, but Romano is not very optimistic about quick activation: It seems more likely they want to refrain from activating Segregated Witness on altcoins because that would give them even less reason to hold off activation on Bitcoin.
Romano went even further. Maybe F2Pool are under some hidden pressure or coercion, and are trying to make a plausible cover story. It is well known that Jihan Wu of Bitmain controls the supply of about 70 percent of the mining hardware. His mining pool is blocking SegWit on Bitcoin, and he is able to exert pressure on miners and pools by sanctioning new equipment sales should they go against his wishes.
For the lazy people these are his contributions:
What we are seeing is a stalling tactic from miners, Viacoin lead developer Romano told Bitcoin Magazine. They know that if SegWit activates on altcoins, it will make blocking it on Bitcoin even less credible.
SegWit signaling will start soon on Viacoin, but Romano is not very optimistic about quick activation: It seems more likely they want to refrain from activating Segregated Witness on altcoins because that would give them even less reason to hold off activation on Bitcoin.
Romano went even further. Maybe F2Pool are under some hidden pressure or coercion, and are trying to make a plausible cover story. It is well known that Jihan Wu of Bitmain controls the supply of about 70 percent of the mining hardware. His mining pool is blocking SegWit on Bitcoin, and he is able to exert pressure on miners and pools by sanctioning new equipment sales should they go against his wishes.
Jihan Wu reply
But not even 3 days later...
link: http://archive.is/YA0xS
In conclusion: I was right. Jihan Wu is lying. He does pressure miners & pools. He just got exposed
So you can not implement segwit until Jihan Wu changes his attitude as he is behind Bitcoin unlimited???
Re: [ANN] IOE | Blockchain developed for businesses| POW\POS| Airdrop| Launched now
Airdrop update:
All users will have to confirm their nicknames + send IOE address in PM.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BMwZbgP5rrHsNs0i0IWGHs6yYrEjRVf1iI_u60MRD_E/edit?usp=sharing
I will collect those PM´s and I will update airdrop google document with verified addresses.
Once I will recieve verified address I will sent coins.
All users will have to confirm their nicknames + send IOE address in PM.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BMwZbgP5rrHsNs0i0IWGHs6yYrEjRVf1iI_u60MRD_E/edit?usp=sharing
I will collect those PM´s and I will update airdrop google document with verified addresses.
Once I will recieve verified address I will sent coins.
PS:By the way don't send me any airdrop, take it and shove it somewhere where sun does not shine. @r
Re: [ANN] [VIA] ★ Viacoin ★ ~ the future of digital currency ~ ★
oh boy, I know I should not feed but here you go:
dont think that btcdrak is your employee cause you bought some coins of a crypto open source project. You should not treat him like one. Conditions were very clear from the beginning. This is not a traditional organisation and you are not doing any good by being "heroic". Call me a coward, I dont mind. I think you are missing the whole point: Your are not an investor, you are a participant of this project. However, your participation is limited to attacking the most active members of this community.
I can imagine that drak is just tired to respond to the reurcurring shitstoms here. I would find it tireing to allways defend myself against all the paranoia and greed. And if you panic, you clearly invested more than you can afford to loose.
I am in the same boat and lost btc if the price does not recover. Differnce is, I was aware that this might happen.
Having said that, I am quite confident that he will keep working for this project and that via can be sucessful.
regards,
Karmala
And the Barabbas figure that allways has the same to say on every forum page.....just click the ignore button
Thanks to barabbas the thread started to come alive again.
Re: ★ [ANN] [HANSA] ★ First Auto-Verification Payment coin ★ LAUNCED join in :)
someone is mining with 1,279,722 kh. at suprnova That is equivalent to 1828 of r9 280. 
or maybe he is renting 
Re: [ANNOUNCE] RPC Ace - a simple cut-down block explorer alternative
Thanks for the reply. I will try again with your recommendations.
Let me know how it works out. If you can't get it to work, let me know the details of your PHP environment, your viacoin.conf and so on and we might be able to figure out what's wrong.
Re: [ANNOUNCE] RPC Ace - a simple cut-down block explorer alternative
I am trying tally.php with viacoin but script aborts after 1200 blocks. I am wondering if someone help me on this. Viacoin didnt issue any coins in first 10000 block apart from 1st block with 10 million premine. I am thinking if there is a limit for empty rpc calls. Thanks in advance.
xxxx@ubuntu:/var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras$ php tally.php tally.txt373652 blocks ... 1000 (tx# 999) 1200 (tx# 1199) PHP Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras/tally.php on line 56
aborted - 1199 transactions through 1 unique addresses counted
xxxx@ubuntu:/var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras$ php tally.php tally.txt373652 blocks ... 1000 (tx# 999) 1200 (tx# 1199) PHP Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras/tally.php on line 56
aborted - 1199 transactions through 1 unique addresses counted
I tried tallying Viacoin on my dev system (PHP5.6/OS X) and my two test systems (PHP5.6/FreeBSD and PHP5.5.4/Mint~Ubuntu) and it works perfectly on all three setups, no hiccups:
Code:
380101 blocks ... 1000 (tx# 999) 2000 (tx# 1999) 3000 (tx# 2999)
...
379000 (tx# 483117) 380000 (tx# 484442) done! 484569 transactions through 96909 unique addresses counted
VbWdvrSjUcNmXbzcV8RoM1NmJNGXLk6f8h 2500000
VvFp7K6JH2tpEdCWDqKoZSHYFPzCYpQHRE 1500000.018
Via2XCHoqQxACVuXf4vrajVDJetwVgxLMz 1087512.7926959
Vi1CCHqqeAwxaKTmvLeY9FVNG4QMW1GFex 507061.96643365
VboG1dsDJfFD83M6fMtftfLfMXmLEe5KQV 254000
VutuLs7wbpWbmHby7gZVtL18FRvi3Jc34e 253399.998
VaXuoUBVpN671ynbNQ4Lno86MEfYXhqn76 204856.8025629
VbckMJ2iuWs9QCwtHAnUczZKTyqfgJ6jtJ 200000
Vn6XAtzqpYbWdpsVPGMAma8HivZo9vd3t4 199449.998
VqPrpeAYGGrkDtWqZ7i71LrnaQhaAH5di3 186871.35337862
Vkco4M3ZagejS8LAzXWh14D2B3L1sGi1ZG 179439.61787044
...
...
379000 (tx# 483117) 380000 (tx# 484442) done! 484569 transactions through 96909 unique addresses counted
VbWdvrSjUcNmXbzcV8RoM1NmJNGXLk6f8h 2500000
VvFp7K6JH2tpEdCWDqKoZSHYFPzCYpQHRE 1500000.018
Via2XCHoqQxACVuXf4vrajVDJetwVgxLMz 1087512.7926959
Vi1CCHqqeAwxaKTmvLeY9FVNG4QMW1GFex 507061.96643365
VboG1dsDJfFD83M6fMtftfLfMXmLEe5KQV 254000
VutuLs7wbpWbmHby7gZVtL18FRvi3Jc34e 253399.998
VaXuoUBVpN671ynbNQ4Lno86MEfYXhqn76 204856.8025629
VbckMJ2iuWs9QCwtHAnUczZKTyqfgJ6jtJ 200000
Vn6XAtzqpYbWdpsVPGMAma8HivZo9vd3t4 199449.998
VqPrpeAYGGrkDtWqZ7i71LrnaQhaAH5di3 186871.35337862
Vkco4M3ZagejS8LAzXWh14D2B3L1sGi1ZG 179439.61787044
...
I'm not sure what "empty RPC calls" mean. Inspecting individual blocks in the Viacoin chain I don't see anything out of the ordinary. All blocks (including blocks 1-9999) contain coinbases and legitimate transactions with inputs and outputs, and even if they amount to 0 coins this doesn't affect anything.
With the risk of sounding like a broken record, I suspect that you didn't build the block chain with full transaction indexing from the start, as the instructions demand. It's not enough to just add "txindex=1" in your viacoin.conf and start the daemon/wallet up again - you need to remove the entire block chain and rebuild it from scratch, from block 0, with txindex=1 set already from the start.
Thanks for the reply. I will try again with your recommendations.
Re: [ANNOUNCE] RPC Ace - a simple cut-down block explorer alternative
I am trying tally.php with viacoin but script aborts after 1200 blocks. I am wondering if someone help me on this. Viacoin didnt issue any coins in first 10000 block apart from 1st block with 10 million premine. I am thinking if there is a limit for empty rpc calls. Thanks in advance.
xxxx@ubuntu:/var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras$ php tally.php tally.txt373652 blocks ... 1000 (tx# 999) 1200 (tx# 1199) PHP Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras/tally.php on line 56
aborted - 1199 transactions through 1 unique addresses counted
xxxx@ubuntu:/var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras$ php tally.php tally.txt373652 blocks ... 1000 (tx# 999) 1200 (tx# 1199) PHP Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/rpc-ace-via/extras/tally.php on line 56
aborted - 1199 transactions through 1 unique addresses counted