-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
No centrality matches #12
Comments
Are you using the default configuration? |
Yes, it's the default configuration. |
I cannot replicate your issue when reading the graph directly from lnd
I notice your filtered edge count is very small, try removing this line (66) from GraphFilter |
I'm using lncli version 0.13.3-beta commit=v0.13.3-beta. I commented out that line in GraphFilter and I still get the same result: |
Also, why is it recommending ACINQ if I already have a channel with them? Maybe because the liquidity isn't currently balanced enough in that channel? |
I cannot replicate your error, my best guess now is that the minimum relevant channel size was set to something large. It really should not recommend channels you've already connected to, but it appears that my node does not know about your channel with ACINQ, it is only 2 days old. |
Should I upload my describegraph.json file here to help you reproduce the issue? Here's the conf file: [GraphFilters] [CandidateFilters] [Other] thanks! |
I suggest waiting a couple of days for the graph data to readjust. |
That makes sense. Ok, thanks! |
9 days later and now only 1 match. Loaded graph. Number of nodes: 20094 Edges: 84252 |
Are you running on Neutrino by chance? My node is also running into issues right now, and I highly suspect Neutrino at this point. |
I don't think so. How can I check? It is running umbrel. The blockchain is fully synced. |
As far as I know, Umbrel is a full node, not Neutrino. My best guess for a graph issue is channel sizes not being recorded correctly (I'm currently witnessing this on my node) If that's not the problem, I'll have to take a look at your copy of the graph to get a better understanding of your node's network view. |
Yes, it says bitcoin.node=bitcoind I set minrelevantchan=0 and it gave 3 matches: Is that normal? How many matches does it usually return? |
It should find 400-800 depending on the size of your node and your settings. |
I really have no idea how to inspect that data. I've uploaded the file here in case you have a moment to check it: |
I don't see anything wrong from a first inspection. I'll take a more detailed look later. |
Thanks! |
I've replicated your issue with your copy of the graph. |
I searched a bit and found the cause of the issue you described: They say that there's no way to rebuild the graph without closing all the channels and doing everything all over again. Even if my LND is running with --routing.assumechanvalid, will your script work if I connect to LND remotely instead of using the describegraph.json file? I'm guessing that it wouldn't work since it would just use the same internal graph data. So it seems that I won't be able to use your script locally and will only be able to rely on your website! I think more people will face this issue because I'm using a standard Umbrel configuration. |
Thanks, that helps. Does Umbrel really run with assumechanvalid? I'm not convinced that the issue is fully explained yet. |
Yea, I installed on AWS 2 weeks ago straight from the Umbrel repo. Maybe older versions didn't have that flag. Your website gives me a few suggestions and almost all of them are channels that I have already opened. |
That flag is deprecated and should not be enabled for Umbrel. Based on the issue you linked, it sounds like I will have to create a new node just for tracking the graph for the website. |
I searched the umbrel repo for assumechanvalid and I don't see any mention of it. It seems like it might not be enabled: |
I researched this issue because Im running into the same problem. The reason why you didnt find assumechanvalid in the Umbrel code is because this setting has been renamed to "neutrino.validatechannels" and defaults to false.
I guess the only option I have is to re-install LND on another machine without Neutrino, and re-sync the whole graph :s |
If you have used neutrino on your node at any point some channels will have unknown capacity values. IMPORTANT: |
I created a fresh describegraph.json file and had the script generate its own improvecentrality.conf file, yet I still don't get any matches. Very odd.
I do see matches when I check a different tool:
https://www.moneni.com/nodematch?node=03cd502dee15bb9859a6d9c56a5608c1f76894736ec4cfec906eb025b7623293dc
Loaded graph. Number of nodes: 19004 Edges: 82124
Latest update in graph: Mon Oct 11 08:21:45 2021
Simplified graph. Number of nodes: 11871 Edges: 4423
Performing analysis for BitcoinRevolution
First filtering pass found 0 candidates for new channels
Running modified farness score calculations
Completed modified farness score calculations in 1.7s
Checking 1ML availability statistics
1ML availability filter selected 0 candidates for new channels in 0.0s
No candidates found, is your graph stale?
If issue persists, delete describegraph.json and improvecentrality.conf
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "scripts/lndpytools/improvecentrality.py", line 248, in
main()
File "scripts/lndpytools/improvecentrality.py", line 239, in main
raise ValueError('No valid candidates')
ValueError: No valid candidates
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: