hi team-exor Can the function of Extracted by be added? For example https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ltc/

[msy2008]

For example
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ltc/

[joeuhren]

A feature like that could definitely be added, although the main question I have is who is entering the data to link a wallet address to a particular mining pool or website? I assume it is the site admin who enters that, because I don't see a clear way for users to claim their own address on the chainz.cryptoid.info site.

At a minimum, you could do the following:

• Add a field to the tx model which stores the address hash
• Modify the save_tx function to pull the mining winners address and store it in the new address hash field in tx
• Add an Extracted column to the index.pug that displays the new address hash field in tx (make sure to include rl_labels.pug to display custom labels)
• Manually map each mining pool to the wallet address(es) they claim to control in the "labels" section of the settings.json (this step can be done at any time but will require a restart of the explorer to pick up the most recent changes)
• Do a full resync of the explorer data to populate the extracted address for older blocks

You could even get away without using the label feature if you just care about displaying the wallet address beside each transaction on the homepage. If you don't like the label feature, and would rather see the pool name instead of the actual wallet address like is done on chainz.cryptoid.info, you would need to modify the code even further to add a new section to the settings.json which is similar to the labels feature but can be used to override the wallet address name, similar to how the "claim address" feature currently does it.

I'm currently in the middle of some bigger changes as I inch closer to a 2.0 release, and truth-be-told, I'm not so interested in this feature for my own use. That being said, this project is open source and you are welcome to add the feature yourself following the steps I provided above. I will even pay you in Exor coins if you can provide a pull request and your implementation is of high enough quality that will be beneficial to everyone. I'm also accepting donations as a way to put features like this to the top of my queue if you would like to see this feature added to the official source so that you can still enjoy official updates and improvements. If interested to explore that option, you can find my Discord and Telegram contact info on the main README page where we can discuss further in private.

[msy2008]

Thanks a lot for your answer! You did a great job!
I am sure there will be a lot of cryptocurrency projects that will see your work and keep up the good work.

[joeuhren]

Please note that this request has been added to Exor's public task list and development will begin as soon as the funding goal has been met.

View more details here: https://exor.io/task?id=2&tid=652e970fd0c422e3ed64b63da1f07050bc8abef7

[joeuhren]

This feature has now been integrated into the explorer. Commit: c239f12

After careful review, the "Extracted by" data was already available to all applicable datasets and therefore it is not necessary to perform a full reindex of the block data. For those who are interested in this feature and are already running an explorer you can upgrade to the new codebase by running npm run update-explorer. There are 4 new settings to allow displaying the "Extracted By" data on the homepage, block page, transaction page and/or in the /ext/getlasttxs api. All new settings default to being off so you will need to add the new settings and enable whichever ones are desired.

Also keep in mind that this feature may only be applicable to mining and staking coins that do not have multiple block rewards. For example, coins that have staking and masternode rewards have the data typically bundled together in the same coinbase tx without a distinction between which is the staking reward and which is the masternode reward. In that case both addresses will be returned even though only 1 address is the actual address that extracted the block, because there is no discernable way to differentiate between the 2 without some extra information about which address is which and that info is often not present in the raw block data.

I am closing this issue as complete, but feel free to reopen the issue if you notice any problems or have questions about how the feature works.