Skip to content
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

Bitcoin Mainnet Sync Does Not Work #584

Open
petarkenic opened this issue Aug 24, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Bitcoin Mainnet Sync Does Not Work #584

petarkenic opened this issue Aug 24, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@petarkenic
Copy link

When I run the Bitcoin Kit sample app with a custom seed phrase using BIP44, API, and MainNet as parameters, the sync fails to get my transactions that occurred before the Checkpoint. The associatedTransactions for the correct blockHash do not include any of the transactions that are associated with my addresses under the HD wallet.

@abdrasulov
Copy link
Member

Try to run it with SyncMode.Full mode.

@petarkenic
Copy link
Author

Yes that will work, but the sync is way too long as it does not make use of Checkpoint. There is an issue with syncing transactions when using API as the option.

@abdrasulov
Copy link
Member

We checked syncing via API. It worked well for several test accounts. It uses the following API endpoint to retrieve transaction data https://blockchain.info/multiaddr?active=$addresses. Can you please check if it retrieves the transactions for your addresses? Multiple addresses are joined with the "|" symbol

@petarkenic
Copy link
Author

We resolved the issue. So what happened was that we were using BIP44 but we had some transactions using the BIP49 generated addresses. The API would fetch the transactions and store the respective block hashes in the app DB. However, the SPV sync would not be able to fetch the transactions associated with the block hash stored which led to no transactions showing up. All in all this is not an issue anymore because we switched to using BIP49. Thanks for testing this out and for the response!

I am wondering why in the following code for the BIP44 block we have Bip49RestoreKeyConverter and Bip84RestoreKeyConverter?

Screen Shot 2022-08-29 at 10 34 28 AM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants