Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork #110

atomicals · 2024-01-31T18:39:46Z

Problem

Users who mine the next bitwork difficulty instead of the current will not be awarded the dft mint. This problem is magnified due to the atomicals-js CLI as of the previous version choosing to mine the next bitwork difficulty for an infinitely mineable token.

The user impact is that the users who attempted to mine the next difficulty after a certain threshold will not get their token mint because the indexer does not recognize bitwork difficulties higher than the currently acceptable one.

For example, if the current bitwork is 7777.15 and the next bitwork is 77777 then anyone who mined 77777 will not be accepted because according to the current rules (before this fix) only 7777f is valid (due to the presence of 15).

The solution below focuses on also allowing the 77777 to be mined along with the 7777f since they are both technically the same difficulty.

Solution

The solution presented here is to allow the indexer flexibility to also accept the next difficulty gracefully and award the user their dft mint.

The solution is activated (param ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT) on livenet as of height 828500 and testnet as of height 2576412.

When the new configuration becomes active, a Bitwork will be accepted from the next increment roll over.

Unit tests:

Note: Care must be taken for roll overs with increments that are not necessarily evenly divided by 16.
Run tests with: pytest ./tests/lib/test_atomicals_utils.py

https://github.com/atomicals/atomicals-electrumx/blob/accept-next-bitwork/tests/lib/test_atomicals_utils.py#L463

AlexV525

The idea is good overall. Thanks for the patch which significantly helps users to save their mints!

To prove the next difficulty can be equal to the current, we might make tests to iterate the combination of inc and start to find out if we can avoid anti-patterns as much as possible.

AlexV525 · 2024-02-01T02:01:17Z

tests/lib/test_atomicals_utils.py

@@ -459,3 +460,116 @@ def test_calculate_expected_bitwork_base():
    assert(calculate_expected_bitwork('abcdefe', 33000, 1000, 1, 127) == 'abcdefe000')
    assert(calculate_expected_bitwork('abcdefe', 33000, 1000, 3, 127) == 'abcdefe0000000.2')

+def test_calculate_expected_bitwork_rollover():
+
+    assert(calculate_expected_bitwork('888888888888', 49995, 3333, 1, 64) == '8888.15')


Consider adding cases to guard increments other than 1.

please also consider adding cases for more general cases like: 8888.2, 8888.3, 8888.8, 8888.9

Done, added a variety and using an array-loop

AlexV525 · 2024-02-01T02:06:35Z

electrumx/lib/util_atomicals.py

@@ -1664,6 +1663,21 @@ def get_subname_request_candidate_status(current_height, atomical_info, status,
        'pending_candidate_atomical_id': candidate_id_compact
    }

+# Whether txid is valid for the current and next bitwork
+def is_txid_valid_for_bitwork(txid, bitwork_vec, actual_mints, max_mints, target_increment, starting_target, allow_next):


For readability: rename to is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork

shadowv0vshadow · 2024-02-01T02:56:10Z

electrumx/server/block_processor.py

-                        return None   
-
+                    mint_bitworkr_start = mint_info_for_ticker.get('$mint_bitworkr_start')
+                    if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:


Get error AttributeError: type object 'BitcoinTestnet' has no attribute 'ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT'

jiedo · 2024-02-01T03:21:51Z

Please don't just fix the problem for the cli mining mode, we need to make the txid that already meets the longer bv prefix valid under any shorter bitwork requirements with ext.

NeutronProtocol · 2024-02-01T04:36:38Z

electrumx/server/block_processor.py

-                        return None   
-
+                    mint_bitworkr_start = mint_info_for_ticker.get('$mint_bitworkr_start')
+                    if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:


nit: this is essentially

Suggested change

if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:

if self.is_dft_bitwork_rollover_activated(height):

shadowv0vshadow · 2024-02-01T10:55:40Z

Fully test, it work, here is my test log

txid: 17fc218b106cad775c2a3a8a47c9ef650deaf4f29bd89007b61625c16329bb17
max_mints_global: None
mint_bitwork_vec: 777777777777
mint_bitworkc_inc: 1
mint_bitworkr_inc: 0
height 2576474
mint_bitworkc_start: 64
bitwork_str: 7777.15
success: True
txid: cccb1574a69913de166b68bccd05f079565a1a9c43981d91c702c202538b21b3
max_mints_global: None
mint_bitwork_vec: 777777777777
mint_bitworkc_inc: 1
mint_bitworkr_inc: 0
height 2576474
mint_bitworkc_start: 64
bitwork_str: None
success: False
txid: d783b6c804ea0cff00ced96cc199f01d7ccba5fed282d7560d42e7c46881a37c
max_mints_global: None
mint_bitwork_vec: 777777777777
mint_bitworkc_inc: 1
mint_bitworkr_inc: 0
height 2576477
mint_bitworkc_start: 64
bitwork_str: 77777
success: True
perpetual
txid: dc5ece2dd7b248d289aa4376019165b2a21880d10ed6cbb53ae97cdbba0cb7de
max_mints_global: None
mint_bitwork_vec: 777777777777
mint_bitworkc_inc: 1
mint_bitworkr_inc: 0
height 2576477
mint_bitworkc_start: 64
bitwork_str: 77777
success: True
perpetual
txid: 815ac388f2cb856c01c6aad4dd56656b948bc71872c2f103bb565bad75c2e2f3
max_mints_global: None
mint_bitwork_vec: 777777777777
mint_bitworkc_inc: 1
mint_bitworkr_inc: 0
height 2576478
mint_bitworkc_start: 64
bitwork_str: 77777
success: True

The only failed tx's bitwork is 7777b, Indexer accpeted the 77777 when mint_bitworkc_current equal 7777.15.

atomicals · 2024-02-01T14:17:25Z

Please review again as there have been some changes and additional tests to accept the next full complete bitwork string.

ie: 88888 should be valid for 8888.10

shadowv0vshadow · 2024-02-01T14:28:58Z

electrumx/lib/util_atomicals.py

+    base_bitwork_padded = bitwork_vec.ljust(32, '0') 
+    b = base_bitwork_padded[:current_prefix_len]
+    p = base_bitwork_padded[:current_prefix_len + 1]
+    print(f'next_full_bitwork_prefix b={b} p={p} ')


No need print, logger.debug?

Done and removed

AlexV525 · 2024-02-01T14:35:53Z

electrumx/server/block_processor.py

+                    mint_bitworkr_start = mint_info_for_ticker.get('$mint_bitworkr_start')
+                    if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:
+                        if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['commit_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):
+                            self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkc_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')


Suggested change

self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkc_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')

self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkr_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')

AlexV525 · 2024-02-01T14:36:10Z

electrumx/server/block_processor.py

+                            return None
+                    else: 
+                        if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['reveal_location_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, False):
+                            self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkc_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')


Suggested change

self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkc_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')

self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkr_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')

AlexV525 · 2024-02-01T14:39:19Z

electrumx/server/block_processor.py

-
+                    mint_bitworkr_start = mint_info_for_ticker.get('$mint_bitworkr_start')
+                    if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:
+                        if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['commit_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):


Should be reveal_location_txid?

Suggested change

if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['commit_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):

if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['reveal_location_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):

ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT not define, need fix

…tual_bitwork

AlexV525 · 2024-02-02T01:56:53Z

FYI to everyone: the activation height is 828628 instead of 828500.

atomicals-electrumx/electrumx/lib/coins.py

Line 669 in 2372c56

ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_DFT_BITWORK_ROLLOVER = 828628

atomicals force-pushed the accept-next-bitwork branch from ae99739 to 84608d9 Compare January 31, 2024 18:41

AlexV525 reviewed Feb 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

shadowv0vshadow reviewed Feb 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

NeutronProtocol reviewed Feb 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

shadowv0vshadow reviewed Feb 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

AlexV525 reviewed Feb 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

Ardwin added 8 commits February 1, 2024 16:34

Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork

5fed7c8

Update activation of dft bitwork rollover

0cbca27

Add extra test for increment by more than 1 such as 5

15998b6

Correctly accept the next full bitwork prefix string

5b85d32

rename of method is_txid_valid_for_bitwork to is_txid_valid_for_perpe…

9b6b00e

…tual_bitwork

Fix reveal tx

e39808e

Correctly get bitwork rollover activation

5099e25

Add additional tests for rollover

077d276

atomicals force-pushed the accept-next-bitwork branch from a73ec52 to 077d276 Compare February 1, 2024 19:34

Ardwin added 2 commits February 1, 2024 20:09

Update activation height to 828628

4c1891d

Catch edgecase of too much bitwork

b3c5a5e

atomicals force-pushed the accept-next-bitwork branch from bfc74e2 to b3c5a5e Compare February 1, 2024 23:22

atomicals merged commit 2372c56 into master Feb 2, 2024

atomicals deleted the accept-next-bitwork branch April 10, 2024 00:38

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork #110

Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork #110

atomicals commented Jan 31, 2024 •

edited

Loading

AlexV525 left a comment

AlexV525 Feb 1, 2024

NeutronProtocol Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

AlexV525 Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

shadowv0vshadow Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

jiedo commented Feb 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NeutronProtocol Feb 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

shadowv0vshadow commented Feb 1, 2024

atomicals commented Feb 1, 2024

shadowv0vshadow Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

AlexV525 Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

AlexV525 Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

AlexV525 Feb 1, 2024

shadowv0vshadow Feb 1, 2024

atomicals Feb 1, 2024

AlexV525 commented Feb 2, 2024

	if height >= self.coin.ATOMICALS_ACTIVATION_HEIGHT_BITWORKEXT:
	if self.is_dft_bitwork_rollover_activated(height):

	self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkc_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')
	self.logger.warning(f'create_or_delete_decentralized_mint_output: mint_bitworkr_inc not is_mint_pow_valid {hash_to_hex_str(tx_hash)}, atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs={atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs}...')

	if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['commit_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):
	if not is_txid_valid_for_perpetual_bitwork(atomicals_operations_found_at_inputs['reveal_location_txid'], mint_bitwork_vec, decentralized_mints, max_mints, mint_bitworkr_inc, mint_bitworkr_start, True):

Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork #110

Allow perpetual dft mining to correctly accept the next bitwork #110

Conversation

atomicals commented Jan 31, 2024 • edited Loading

AlexV525 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jiedo commented Feb 1, 2024 • edited Loading

NeutronProtocol Feb 1, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shadowv0vshadow commented Feb 1, 2024

atomicals commented Feb 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlexV525 commented Feb 2, 2024

atomicals commented Jan 31, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jiedo commented Feb 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NeutronProtocol Feb 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading