There is a dev-network in my project which is including Accounts-sdk, Token-sdk. The project is about transfer of custom tokens between accounts of same node as well as different node. The network is suddenly not notarising the transition which was working for a long time. Now I am not able to transfer the tokens and I am able to transfer the token if I issue the fresh token and transfer. After two or three transactions of transfer the network is again not notarising the transaction.
Throwing
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: net.corda.core.flows.NotaryException: Unable to notarise transaction AD57C34EA40953561B90C5EB832336E4E42CD2C876CA5030C986B9EB50909AE7 : One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details: today at 1:05:43 PM14BBC38DF7BDA1FD6CA8E97DB16967FBFC9B18AB95DCD7B1990892C206759FA3(1) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=6190DA0ABAD95B767AB42351368A1D51FCCE164DD08D256F98E065F54B6EE789, type=INPUT_STATE). today at 1:05:43 PMTo find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command.] with root cause today at 1:05:43 PM net.corda.core.flows.NotaryException: Unable to notarise transaction AD57C34EA40953561B90C5EB832336E4E42CD2C876CA5030C986B9EB50909AE7 : One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details: today at 1:05:43 PM14BBC38DF7BDA1FD6CA8E97DB16967FBFC9B18AB95DCD7B1990892C206759FA3(1) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=6190DA0ABAD95B767AB42351368A1D51FCCE164DD08D256F98E065F54B6EE789, type=INPUT_STATE). today at 1:05:43 PMTo find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command.
I am not able to understand why the transfer of token is not been notarised.
Why the network went un-notarising the transfer tokens transaction?
how can I resolve the problem?
It looks like the transaction used to transfer the token is using an input reference that has already been consumed. You can see the transaction id and the output index that is creating the problem in the error description, which could be of some help to debug the issue.
Related
There is an issue in a topology of 3 hosts.
Primary has a scheduled OS-task (every hour) to delete archive logs older 3 hours with RMAN. Archivelog deletion policy is configured to "Applied on all standby".
There are 2 remote log_archive_dest entries - Physical Standby and Downstream. Every day there appears a "RMAN-08120: WARNING: archived log not deleted, not yet applied by standby" in the task's logs and than it resolves in 2-3 hours.
I've checked V$ARCHIVE_LOG during the issue and figured out, that the redos are not applied on the Downstream server. I have not caught the issue on the Downstream server yet, but during the "good" periods all the apply processes are enabled, but the dba_apply_progress view tells me, that apply_time of the messages is 01-JAN-1970.
The dba_capture view tells that capture processes' statuses are ENABLED, status_change_time is approximately the time of the RMAN-issue resolved.
I'm new to the Golden Gate, Streams and Downstream technologies. I've read the reference Oracle Docs, but couldn't find anything about some schedule for capture or apply processes.
Could someone please help to figure out, what else to check or what to read?
Grateful for every response.
Thanks.
I need to check how the notary prevents the double spending in the Obligation Cordapp. I started the web server UI at the localhost ports and performed some multiple transactions and when I checked the notary's log ,I found this:
[WARN ] 2020-06-24T08:29:33,484Z [Notary request queue processor] transactions.PersistentUniquenessProvider. - Unable to notarise: One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details:
7CF1BCA8EDF25F0602BBEDF8AD41FD60336F65EAC09C5326478A4CB7CD620579(0) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=46552C5CE153712B65585A75C4D165CD4A05304564C8797ACEF317DCD925B72E, type=INPUT_STATE).
To find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command. [errorCode=1g4005y, moreInformationAt=https://errors.corda.net/OS/4.5-RC02/1g4005y]
net.corda.core.internal.notary.NotaryInternalException: Unable to notarise: One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details:
7CF1BCA8EDF25F0602BBEDF8AD41FD60336F65EAC09C5326478A4CB7CD620579(0) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=46552C5CE153712B65585A75C4D165CD4A05304564C8797ACEF317DCD925B72E, type=INPUT_STATE).
To find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command.
I performed hashLookup on the invalid txId and found this :
hashLookup 46552C5CE153712B65585A75C4D165CD4A05304564C8797ACEF317DCD925B72E
Found a matching transaction with Id: A86E3ECE4EC12A487E413E2BDAB9D88BFEBCB418FA0224189DE0C72BBBD34B12
I believe this is how notary has stopped the double spending. But I am unable to recreate that testing.Can someone tell me what possible input transaction has led to this error.I mean what test case can lead to this testing of double spend that is stopped by notary?
A notary is a network service that provides uniqueness consensus by attesting that, for a given transaction, it has not already signed other transactions that consumes any of the proposed transaction’s input states.
In other words, the notary will keep track of all the input states (only stores their hashes, not the real state) that are used in transactions, so when someone is trying to use these already-spent inputs, the notary will reject the transaction.
Hence, preventing the double spend.
I wanted to resize RAM and CPU of my machine, so I stopped the VM instance and when I tried to start it I got an error:
The zone 'projects/freesarkarijobalerts/zones/asia-south1-a' does not
have enough resources available to fulfill the request. Try a
different zone, or try again later.`
Here you can see the screenshot.
I've tried to start VM instance today, but result was the same and I got an error message again:
The zone 'projects/freesarkarijobalerts/zones/asia-south1-a' does not
have enough resources available to fulfill the request. Try a
different zone, or try again later.`
Then I tried to move my instance to different region, but I got an error message:
sarkarijobalerts123#cloudshell:~ (freesarkarijobalerts)$ gcloud compute instances move wordpress-2-vm --zone=asia-south1-a --destination-zone=asia-south1-b
Moving gce instance wordpress-2-vm...failed.
ERROR: (gcloud.compute.instances.move) Instance cannot be moved while in state: TERMINATED
My website is DOWN for a couple of days, please help me.
The standard procedure is to create a snapshot out of the stopped VM instance [1] and then create a new one in another zone [2].
[1] https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/disks/create-snapshots
[2] https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/disks/restore-and-delete-snapshots#restore_a_snapshot_of_a_persistent_disk_to_a_new_disk
Let's have a look at the cause of this issue:
When you stop an instance it releases some resources like vCPU and memory.
When you start an instance it requests resources like vCPU and memory back and if there's not enough resources available in the zone you'll get an error message:
Error: The zone 'projects/freesarkarijobalerts/zones/asia-south1-a' does not have enough resources available to fulfill the request. Try a different zone, or try again later.
more information available in the documentation:
If you receive a resource error (such as ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED
or ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED_WITH_DETAILS) when requesting new
resources, it means that the zone cannot currently accommodate your
request. This error is due to Compute Engine resource obtainability,
and is not due to your Compute Engine quota.
Resource availability are depending from users requests and therefore are dynamic.
There are a few ways to solve your issue:
Move your instance to another zone by following instructions.
Wait for a while and try to start your VM instance again.
Reserve resources for your VM by following documentation to avoid such issue in future:
Create reservations for Virtual Machine (VM) instances in a specific
zone, using custom or predefined machine types, with or without
additional GPUs or local SSDs, to ensure resources are available for
your workloads when you need them. After you create a reservation, you
begin paying for the reserved resources immediately, and they remain
available for your project to use indefinitely, until the reservation
is deleted.
While upgrading from Corda 3 to Corda 4, I have an issue commiting a State to our node's ledger with only one Party. A single Party is able to create a state, notarize it, but CANNOT commit to the Corda 4 ledger without asking for an external third party.
The error Corda 4 produces (which Corda 3 did not produce) is the following:
(1) java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: A flow session for each external participant to the transaction must be provided. If you wish to continue using this insecure API then specify a target platform version of less than 4 for your CorDapp.
More specific context: Using FinalityFlow without a session yields a 'session required for external parties' error and does not complete. Adding only a session (e.g. session = initiateFlow(PartyA) ) results in an error that 'local nodes should not be included.'
Is there a workaround regarding this solution? It's important (for our use case) that a single Party can create a State and modify the State information without the involvement of other parties. Other use cases (where multiple parties are included) stem from this use case. Any guidance is greatly appreciated.
I think the error message is pretty spot on here. Just change the way you call FinalityFlow during your issuance such that it doesn’t contain a flow session to itself i.e.
return subFlow(new FinalityFlow(signedTransaction));
Although you may get a deprecation warning, in which case, do the following
return subFlow(FinalityFlow(stx, emptyList()))
We have been seeing the following 'warnings' in the event log of our BizTalk
machine since upgrading to BTS 2006. They seem to occur
randomly 6 or 8 times per day.
Does anyone know what this means and what needs to be done to clear it up?
we have only one BizTalk server which is running on only one machine.
I am new to BizTalk, so I am unable to find how many tracking host instances running for BizTalk server. Also, can you please let me know that we can configure only one instance for one server/machine?
Source: BAM EventBus Service
Event: 5
Warning Details:
Execute batch error. Exception information: TDDS failed to batch execution
of streams. SQLServer: bizprod, Database: BizTalkDTADb.Cannot insert
duplicate key row in object 'dta_MessageFieldValues' with unique index
'IX_MessageFieldValues'.
The statement has been terminated..
I see you got a partial answer in your MSDN Post
go to BizTalk Admin Console ,check in Platform Settings -> Hosts, in the list of hosts on the right, confirm that only a single Host has the Tracking column marked as Yes.
As to your other question. Yes you can run a Single Host Instance on a Single Server. Although when your server starts to come under a bit of load you may want to consider setting up some more so you can balance the workload better.