1 2017-01-17T00:03:49  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2017-01-17T00:05:13  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
  3 2017-01-17T00:09:49  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2017-01-17T00:29:36  *** kvnn has quit IRC
  5 2017-01-17T00:41:36  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
  6 2017-01-17T00:47:29  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  7 2017-01-17T00:50:53  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2017-01-17T00:50:58  *** abpa has quit IRC
  9 2017-01-17T01:06:43  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2017-01-17T01:16:36  *** Netmage has quit IRC
 11 2017-01-17T01:17:36  *** Netmage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2017-01-17T01:44:54  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
 13 2017-01-17T02:00:30  *** Guest38975 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2017-01-17T02:07:06  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 15 2017-01-17T02:08:11  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2017-01-17T02:12:51  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 17 2017-01-17T02:19:37  <BlueMatt> wumpus: fwiw, i vote we hold merge window for a day or two for things already pending incl the hd split (which I think is one more set of fixups, hopefully tomorrow, away, and is not as hard to review as it looks), bumpfee pending discussion tomorrow (I'm pretty happy with it if we fix the two pending issues - listunspent, which may just be a docs change, and getbalance, which may also just be a docs change), the compact-block-orphan-r
 18 2017-01-17T02:19:37  <BlueMatt> ejects one (which looks pretty much mergeable to me) and preferably the extra message handler waker (9561, which is both trivial and a big gain)
 19 2017-01-17T02:19:47  <BlueMatt> but I'd understand if thats not a popular opinion
 20 2017-01-17T02:29:22  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2017-01-17T02:29:31  <fanquake> wummpus / sipa are you around?
 22 2017-01-17T02:29:35  <fanquake> *wumpus
 23 2017-01-17T02:34:21  <fanquake> Or anyone with admin on bitcoin/bitcoin, there is a user spamming the repo with links/comments.
 24 2017-01-17T02:35:34  <fanquake> I have deleted most for now.
 25 2017-01-17T02:43:20  <sipa>  sigh
 26 2017-01-17T02:43:28  <sipa> sorry, i can't really access github now
 27 2017-01-17T02:53:09  *** dermoth_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2017-01-17T02:53:37  *** dermoth has quit IRC
 29 2017-01-17T02:53:39  *** dermoth_ is now known as dermoth
 30 2017-01-17T03:25:40  <sipa> fanquake: blocked
 31 2017-01-17T03:55:15  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/812714fd80e9...6696b4635ceb
 32 2017-01-17T03:55:16  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f13914a Matt Corallo: Make WakeMessageHandler public
 33 2017-01-17T03:55:16  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 241d893 Matt Corallo: Wake message handling thread when we receive a new block...
 34 2017-01-17T03:55:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6696b46 Pieter Wuille: Merge #9561: Wake message handling thread when we receive a new block...
 35 2017-01-17T03:55:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #9561: Wake message handling thread when we receive a new block (master...2017-01-wakeup-on-new-block) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9561
 36 2017-01-17T04:05:13  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2017-01-17T04:12:39  <sipa> BlueMatt: sorry, need sleep first
 38 2017-01-17T04:13:14  <BlueMatt> I still vote we push back freeze a day or two, given today was a holiday in the us and many folks werent working all weekend
 39 2017-01-17T04:13:18  <BlueMatt> :p
 40 2017-01-17T04:14:12  <BlueMatt> and so I can shamelessly get folks to review #9535 :p
 41 2017-01-17T04:14:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9535 | Split CNode::cs_vSend: message processing and message sending by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9535 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 42 2017-01-17T04:31:31  <luke-jr> I ended up being away for yesterday & today, so another day or two may be helpful
 43 2017-01-17T04:31:55  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2017-01-17T04:31:59  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 45 2017-01-17T04:34:35  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 46 2017-01-17T04:48:59  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2017-01-17T05:52:08  *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2017-01-17T05:54:28  *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
 49 2017-01-17T06:10:54  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 50 2017-01-17T07:01:51  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2017-01-17T07:12:43  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 52 2017-01-17T08:10:29  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 53 2017-01-17T08:11:13  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2017-01-17T08:15:31  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 55 2017-01-17T08:23:45  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 56 2017-01-17T08:37:28  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2017-01-17T08:43:26  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 58 2017-01-17T08:47:35  * jonasschnelli request a retest of: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9294 from BlueMatt luke-jr (thanks in advance!)
 59 2017-01-17T09:18:59  *** wasi has quit IRC
 60 2017-01-17T09:21:18  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
 61 2017-01-17T09:24:46  <wumpus> I've extended the section on named arguments in the release notes a bit: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/0.14.0-Release-notes#support-for-json-rpc-named-arguments
 62 2017-01-17T09:25:24  *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2017-01-17T09:25:33  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2017-01-17T09:54:08  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
 65 2017-01-17T10:18:27  *** droark has quit IRC
 66 2017-01-17T10:23:59  *** waxwing__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2017-01-17T10:25:16  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 68 2017-01-17T10:32:03  *** wvr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2017-01-17T10:37:01  *** waxwing__ is now known as waxwing
 70 2017-01-17T10:39:40  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 71 2017-01-17T10:40:02  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2017-01-17T10:43:08  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 73 2017-01-17T10:46:46  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 74 2017-01-17T10:47:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jdust69 opened pull request #9568: 10.13 (master...0.13) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9568
 75 2017-01-17T10:48:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9568: 10.13 (master...0.13) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9568
 76 2017-01-17T10:49:05  *** aalex has quit IRC
 77 2017-01-17T10:49:23  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2017-01-17T10:49:26  *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2017-01-17T10:56:08  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2017-01-17T11:10:50  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 81 2017-01-17T11:15:10  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
 82 2017-01-17T11:21:53  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 83 2017-01-17T11:21:59  *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2017-01-17T11:23:44  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2017-01-17T12:16:29  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9263: release notes: Explicitly mention the removal of free transactions, and do not commit to removal of priority in any given release (master...relnotes_freetxn) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9263
 86 2017-01-17T12:31:03  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2017-01-17T12:34:31  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2017-01-17T12:35:46  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
 89 2017-01-17T12:36:08  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 90 2017-01-17T12:36:29  <morcos> luke-jr: what is the point of doing the release notes on a wiki, if you are going to just merge changes that were explicitly NACK'ed when those same changs were proposed in a PR
 91 2017-01-17T12:36:48  <morcos> all that is going to do is lead to a childish edit war and make it so none of us can use the wiki for release notes
 92 2017-01-17T12:37:05  <morcos> if you know you have a controversial change you want to make you shouldln't just make it and hope no one notices
 93 2017-01-17T12:37:19  <morcos> this is not a proper way of working with other people
 94 2017-01-17T12:59:29  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2017-01-17T13:03:59  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 96 2017-01-17T13:14:21  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2017-01-17T13:15:35  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 98 2017-01-17T13:25:00  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2017-01-17T13:30:37  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
100 2017-01-17T13:32:17  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2017-01-17T14:07:15  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: hey
102 2017-01-17T14:07:22  <BlueMatt> how much longer will you be around?
103 2017-01-17T14:07:31  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: 1-2h at least
104 2017-01-17T14:07:34  <jonasschnelli> hi
105 2017-01-17T14:07:46  <BlueMatt> ok, will circle back around after breakfast and hopefully we can finish this
106 2017-01-17T14:08:09  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I guess and hope I fixed most/all of you points... tell me, if there is more
107 2017-01-17T14:08:31  <BlueMatt> i think it should be good if you hit all the stuff i commented on, i gave it a pretty decent review the first go-around, but it needs another one when I'm awake post-breakfast
108 2017-01-17T14:08:54  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I think your review was very valuable...
109 2017-01-17T14:09:14  <jonasschnelli> We should not rush that change... but hurry up for 0.14. :)=
110 2017-01-17T14:10:17  <BlueMatt> heh, yea, I recommended pushing back yesterday because I'm confident we can get this one in
111 2017-01-17T14:10:46  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I mean if we find something after the freeze, there is time to fix it before the 0.14 release...
112 2017-01-17T14:11:06  <BlueMatt> yup
113 2017-01-17T14:19:00  <sipa> do we want to be a mentoring org for GSOC?
114 2017-01-17T14:20:19  <BlueMatt> does anyone feel like they have time?
115 2017-01-17T14:20:44  <BlueMatt> i mean in theory, maybe, but....
116 2017-01-17T14:20:51  <sipa> yeah...
117 2017-01-17T14:21:25  <sipa> i feel like we should make time for such projects
118 2017-01-17T14:21:36  <sipa> but easier said than done
119 2017-01-17T14:22:01  <BlueMatt> yea
120 2017-01-17T14:22:08  <BlueMatt> obviously agreed
121 2017-01-17T14:25:04  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2017-01-17T14:29:24  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
123 2017-01-17T14:44:25  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: any chance we can s/(used for change outputs, only appears if HD is enabled otherwise there is no need for internal keys)/(used for change outputs, only appears if HD split is enabled, otherwise external keys are used)/
124 2017-01-17T14:44:47  <BlueMatt> and make the corresponding change the the logic
125 2017-01-17T14:44:53  <BlueMatt> should make the docs wayyy clearer
126 2017-01-17T14:45:09  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: Okay. Makese sense I guess.
127 2017-01-17T14:45:15  <jonasschnelli> I liked the idea form luke-jr...
128 2017-01-17T14:45:28  <jonasschnelli> keypoolsize: {"internal": x, "external": y}
129 2017-01-17T14:45:31  <jonasschnelli> But breaks the API
130 2017-01-17T14:45:39  <BlueMatt> yea, agreed lets not break the api
131 2017-01-17T14:45:46  <jonasschnelli> okay.. will update
132 2017-01-17T14:46:26  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt. one meh though...
133 2017-01-17T14:46:36  <jonasschnelli> Do we want to expose "HD split is enabled" to the user?
134 2017-01-17T14:46:52  <jonasschnelli> "HD split" as a label can be confusing...
135 2017-01-17T14:47:05  <BlueMatt> hum, or maybe just "only appears if wallet is using this feature, otherwise external keys are used"?
136 2017-01-17T14:47:11  <jonasschnelli> We could name it "HD internal keypool" or similar
137 2017-01-17T14:47:19  <jonasschnelli> yes. Your text is good
138 2017-01-17T14:47:23  <jonasschnelli> Let me take it
139 2017-01-17T14:47:28  <BlueMatt> ok, cool
140 2017-01-17T14:51:23  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9294/commits/eeeb52afc3b25836588b2b7c6b704a5a6498e1d1
141 2017-01-17T14:51:30  <jonasschnelli> Added to #9294
142 2017-01-17T14:51:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9294 | Use internal HD chain for change outputs (hd split) by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9294 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
143 2017-01-17T14:51:43  <BlueMatt> thanks
144 2017-01-17T14:58:03  *** jnewbery1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2017-01-17T15:01:18  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: do we normally bump wallet versions at release? I think we just set them based on next version pre-merge
146 2017-01-17T15:01:49  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: in 0.13, we bumped to 130000 after the tag/version.bump was made
147 2017-01-17T15:02:08  <BlueMatt> ehh, ok
148 2017-01-17T15:02:19  <jonasschnelli> Otherwise you can't test it and all tests will fail
149 2017-01-17T15:02:27  <BlueMatt> oh, ok, didnt realize that
150 2017-01-17T15:02:35  <BlueMatt> can you not catch(...) in deserialize?
151 2017-01-17T15:02:45  <BlueMatt> we always throw std::ios_base::failure when we read oob
152 2017-01-17T15:02:57  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: the problem there is, that CKeyPool has no record version...
153 2017-01-17T15:03:06  <jonasschnelli> maybe we could check is CDataStream has more bytes?
154 2017-01-17T15:03:10  <BlueMatt> yes, catch(std::ios_base::failure&)
155 2017-01-17T15:03:16  <jonasschnelli> ah.. okay.
156 2017-01-17T15:03:39  <BlueMatt> otherwise you'll catch all kinds of fun garbage that should really reach top-of-thread and assert
157 2017-01-17T15:03:48  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Indeed.
158 2017-01-17T15:05:02  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2017-01-17T15:06:57  *** Sosumi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2017-01-17T15:07:19  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9294/commits/a874b75a180a9e967a3d936cf46df11f8531b70a
161 2017-01-17T15:07:46  <jonasschnelli> I wonder if a simple "are there more bytes?" check would be more appropriate at this place
162 2017-01-17T15:08:02  *** morph has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2017-01-17T15:08:28  <jonasschnelli> On the other hand, a failed deserialization at this point shoud always flag the CKeyPool item fInternal=false
164 2017-01-17T15:13:03  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: ok, the only remaining concern i have is performance - there are a bunch of loops over disk reads introduced for folks who upgrade
165 2017-01-17T15:13:35  <jonasschnelli> Yes. This could be optimised...
166 2017-01-17T15:13:51  <jonasschnelli> I expect BDB to be sort of fast...
167 2017-01-17T15:14:11  <BlueMatt> I think you may be surprised
168 2017-01-17T15:14:15  <BlueMatt> but if its an issue its an easy fix
169 2017-01-17T15:14:25  <instagibbs> that can be fixed post-freeze, yeS?
170 2017-01-17T15:14:30  <jonasschnelli> Yes. CKeyPool should have been fixed long time ago...
171 2017-01-17T15:15:00  <BlueMatt> instagibbs: if it turns out to be a major regression, I'd say yes
172 2017-01-17T15:15:19  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: I can test it with a 100k keypool wallet... and compare
173 2017-01-17T15:16:43  <jonasschnelli> Oh.. lets better start with 50k...
174 2017-01-17T15:17:08  <jonasschnelli> or with 5k,... CKey.Verify() is slow..
175 2017-01-17T15:17:31  <BlueMatt> heh
176 2017-01-17T15:18:03  <sipa> CKey.Verify() can verify 10000 keys per second
177 2017-01-17T15:18:15  <sipa> the slow part is the sync to bdb after every keypool change
178 2017-01-17T15:22:49  <jonasschnelli> okay.. I see..
179 2017-01-17T15:37:25  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: With a 5k wallet, its slightly slower on my Core i7 2.9 GHZ..
180 2017-01-17T15:37:28  <jonasschnelli> getnewaddress: real	0m0.219s
181 2017-01-17T15:39:30  <BlueMatt> vs?
182 2017-01-17T15:40:08  <jonasschnelli> real	0m0.104s
183 2017-01-17T15:40:11  <jonasschnelli> (0.13)
184 2017-01-17T15:41:08  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: I think it's acceptable but we should work on a fix/better-memory map
185 2017-01-17T15:41:19  <BlueMatt> I think its fine for now, I'll let phantomcircuit fix it when he complains
186 2017-01-17T15:42:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #9419: Stop Using cs_main for CNodeState/State() (master...2016-12-nodestate) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9419
187 2017-01-17T15:43:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #9488: Parallel ThreadMessageHandler (master...2017-01-parallel-processmessages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9488
188 2017-01-17T15:43:40  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: oh. Keep in mind, that 0.13er wallet has only 5k keys while the 0.14er wallet has 200% key (=10k)
189 2017-01-17T15:43:40  <jonasschnelli> So.. then the number look even better
190 2017-01-17T16:01:00  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2017-01-17T16:10:06  <morph> hi
192 2017-01-17T16:15:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2017-01-17T16:26:11  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
194 2017-01-17T16:31:12  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2017-01-17T16:51:36  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2017-01-17T16:57:33  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
197 2017-01-17T17:01:13  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2017-01-17T17:04:20  *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
199 2017-01-17T17:12:51  <luke-jr> morcos: YOUR changes were NACK'd.
200 2017-01-17T17:15:01  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2017-01-17T17:15:34  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
202 2017-01-17T17:16:11  <morcos> luke-jr: i didn't have any release note changes except 9531 which were merged with only ACK's. But I'm not going to waste everyone's time arguing with you about this.  I find you very difficult to work with, and so I will just avoid it where possible.
203 2017-01-17T17:16:53  <morcos> I've made my view point on the release notes clear.. If you want to go around changing things behind people's backs, I'm not going to take on the task of trying to stop you.  But you should be aware your actions reflect poorly on all of us.
204 2017-01-17T17:17:35  <luke-jr> morcos: trying to use Core as a vehicle for political agendas is what reflects poorly.
205 2017-01-17T17:18:31  <sipa> luke-jr: stop it
206 2017-01-17T17:18:43  <sipa> there have been more than enough arguments
207 2017-01-17T17:18:50  <sipa> sorry, people disagree with you
208 2017-01-17T17:18:53  <sipa> accept it
209 2017-01-17T17:19:19  <luke-jr> disagreement means we should agree to disagree by having an option, not that you should just get your way and force your opinion on others
210 2017-01-17T17:19:30  <luke-jr> this would all be over if you would just leave it be.
211 2017-01-17T17:20:22  <BlueMatt> this may be true for some thing, but we dont generally support options that are used by +/- one person, especially if they have really big costs to doing so
212 2017-01-17T17:20:34  <BlueMatt> s
213 2017-01-17T17:20:47  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: the cost to leaving the code in place until it gets in someone's de facto way is literally zero.
214 2017-01-17T17:21:21  <BlueMatt> no it is not, it has not been, and it will not be
215 2017-01-17T17:22:13  <luke-jr> I already suggested a compromise that it can be removed at the first occasion of it being a burden to someone who wants to change something there.
216 2017-01-17T17:22:21  <BlueMatt> we're waayyyyy past that point
217 2017-01-17T17:22:41  <sipa> luke-jr: the discussion about it has dragged on for ages, and just the disagreement about it is draining people who want to work on the project
218 2017-01-17T17:22:51  <sipa> it is clear that thid code is useless at this point
219 2017-01-17T17:22:54  <BlueMatt> the compromise is that if you want to support it, you can add additional rpcs which give you access to the appropriate data so you can call prioritizetransaction (ie the fee-bumping command)
220 2017-01-17T17:22:55  <luke-jr> then morcos went and made that inflammatory comment
221 2017-01-17T17:23:06  <sipa> we're doing everyone a favor by just getting past it
222 2017-01-17T17:23:08  <luke-jr> sipa: so stop creating disagreement for no reason
223 2017-01-17T17:23:34  <BlueMatt> the disagreement is that only you disagree, at this point
224 2017-01-17T17:23:34  <sipa> luke-jr: i can say the same
225 2017-01-17T17:23:41  <BlueMatt> hell, even other miners disagree with you
226 2017-01-17T17:23:53  <luke-jr> except I'm not the one who keeps bringing it up and forcing the issue.
227 2017-01-17T17:24:02  <sipa> luke-jr: you're turning a piece of outdated logic from a mouse into an elephant, and i'm tired of having this discussion
228 2017-01-17T17:24:04  <BlueMatt> because everyone wants to just remove the damn code already
229 2017-01-17T17:24:05  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: some miners perhaps. others don't.
230 2017-01-17T17:24:19  <BlueMatt> oh? who other than you?
231 2017-01-17T17:24:20  <luke-jr> nobody is forcing the ones who don't want it to use it.
232 2017-01-17T17:24:23  <BlueMatt> (and dont say wizkid)
233 2017-01-17T17:24:32  <luke-jr> wizkid057 doesn't count now?
234 2017-01-17T17:24:39  <BlueMatt> the amount of work that has gone into maintaining this feature just for eligius is insane
235 2017-01-17T17:24:46  <BlueMatt> we maintain no other feature for one person/group
236 2017-01-17T17:24:52  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
237 2017-01-17T17:24:59  <BlueMatt> if that were our policy we'd still have tonal numbering in bitcoin core
238 2017-01-17T17:25:15  <luke-jr> "still" implying we ever did
239 2017-01-17T17:25:22  <BlueMatt> well, ok, we'd have
240 2017-01-17T17:25:24  <BlueMatt> s/still//
241 2017-01-17T17:25:26  <BlueMatt> same thin
242 2017-01-17T17:25:27  <BlueMatt> g
243 2017-01-17T17:28:56  <luke-jr> not to mention there's no evidence it's only used by one person.
244 2017-01-17T17:31:42  <sipa> there is evidence that only a small percentage of the hash rate uses it (look at the feerate of blocks in transactions... it's clearly feerate sorted, except for a small percentage of txn at the beginning of a very occasional block)
245 2017-01-17T17:32:06  <sipa> furthermore, it is completely useless as a spam prevention mechanism without wallets targetting it
246 2017-01-17T17:32:23  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
247 2017-01-17T17:32:42  <sipa> i'm done arguing about this
248 2017-01-17T17:32:59  <sipa> we'll remove priority mining in 0.15, as far as i'm concerned
249 2017-01-17T17:33:20  <luke-jr> that's simply not true at all. priority works without any targetting.
250 2017-01-17T17:34:02  <sipa> come on
251 2017-01-17T17:35:22  <sipa> a perfectly legitimate wallet's transaction would be treated completely arbitrarily under it
252 2017-01-17T17:35:41  <sipa> all it would accomplish is favor a few people with very old coi s
253 2017-01-17T17:36:01  <sipa> until they start spending recent change
254 2017-01-17T17:38:04  <luke-jr> *any* age/value weighs more than unconfirmed TXOs.
255 2017-01-17T17:38:22  <sipa> if you choose to keep arguing this, i will choose to ignore you
256 2017-01-17T17:41:12  <luke-jr> fine, remove priority. be a jerk and do it before there's even a slightly useful purpose in doing so. but then it's time to stop pretending Core is a politically-neutral reference implementation, since it's de facto being used as a vehicle to force network policy. all you're doing is proving the haters right.
257 2017-01-17T17:46:30  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2017-01-17T17:47:49  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2017-01-17T17:49:58  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2017-01-17T17:50:10  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
261 2017-01-17T18:00:35  *** chjj has quit IRC
262 2017-01-17T18:01:34  <BlueMatt> luke-jr: if there were no way to implement it in the supported apis, maybe you'd have a point...but right now it is /trivial/ to implement priority exactly how you like it in a little python script which loops over the mempool and does manual prioritization
263 2017-01-17T18:02:05  <BlueMatt> luke-jr: if you can honestly tell me you've implemented that, and it wasnt performant enough or there was some other issue preventing it from being practical, maybe I'd have some sympathy, but until then....
264 2017-01-17T18:08:14  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: so just busyloop over RPC mempool listing, maintain an entire copy of the mempool state outside bitcoind, and act as a proxy for explicit miner prioritisation? I can't even imagine a way to do this effectively; it's certainly a heck of a lot more work, less reliable, and far less efficient.
265 2017-01-17T18:08:56  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2017-01-17T18:08:59  <BlueMatt> less efficient? yes, lot more work? I dont believe so...go implement it and prove me wrong
267 2017-01-17T18:09:08  <BlueMatt> i dont think it needs state, just iterate over and clear prioritization as you go
268 2017-01-17T18:09:10  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
269 2017-01-17T18:10:13  <BlueMatt> high_prio = stack(); for transaction in getrawmempool(): if calculate_priority(tx) is highest in stack: place in stack; for transaction not in stack but previously prioritzed: deprioritize; for transaction in stack: prioritize appropriately
270 2017-01-17T18:10:21  <BlueMatt> if thats more than 100 lines of python I'd be surprised
271 2017-01-17T18:10:54  <BlueMatt> and if its too ineffecient for you, please add an rpc which provides all the info needed for calculate_priority so that its super effecient
272 2017-01-17T18:11:11  <BlueMatt> I'd be more than happy to review that
273 2017-01-17T18:13:28  <luke-jr> to have such an RPC means having about half of the priority code stay in Core
274 2017-01-17T18:13:40  <luke-jr> because it comes from the input txouts
275 2017-01-17T18:13:48  <BlueMatt> dont think so? such an rpc could easily only provide things like foreach input: provide txout info
276 2017-01-17T18:14:02  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2017-01-17T18:14:03  <BlueMatt> and that is way more general than priority
278 2017-01-17T18:14:12  <BlueMatt> it allows folks to implement other crazy rules
279 2017-01-17T18:14:17  <BlueMatt> like "spends from address x"
280 2017-01-17T18:14:29  <BlueMatt> (well, admittedly you can kinda already do that by seeing the pubkey)
281 2017-01-17T18:14:32  <luke-jr> but fetching txouts is where the inefficiency came from?
282 2017-01-17T18:14:52  <BlueMatt> fetching txouts is the tightest loop in the above pseudocode
283 2017-01-17T18:14:54  <BlueMatt> so I'd think so
284 2017-01-17T18:15:17  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
285 2017-01-17T18:15:49  <BlueMatt> wumpus: yo
286 2017-01-17T18:15:51  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
287 2017-01-17T18:15:52  <BlueMatt> you still around?
288 2017-01-17T18:16:11  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2017-01-17T18:16:40  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
290 2017-01-17T18:16:59  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2017-01-17T18:20:16  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
292 2017-01-17T18:20:28  *** isle2983 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
293 2017-01-17T18:24:21  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
294 2017-01-17T18:27:53  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: let's continue that topic (or not) post-freeze. either way, it will be easier to maintain priority in Knots than external. and in the meantime, if we haven't frozen yet, I should get back to reviewing stuff
295 2017-01-17T18:28:16  <BlueMatt> its unclear to me if we've frozen or not :/
296 2017-01-17T18:28:28  <luke-jr> well, finishing up review certainly can't hurt either way
297 2017-01-17T18:28:38  <BlueMatt> I mean either we froze, or we have 4 outstnding prs that either go in or dont (todayish, preferably)
298 2017-01-17T18:28:42  <BlueMatt> yea, fair point
299 2017-01-17T18:32:58  *** isle2983 has quit IRC
300 2017-01-17T18:40:30  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2017-01-17T18:40:43  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
302 2017-01-17T18:47:30  *** isle2983 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2017-01-17T18:51:24  *** chjj has quit IRC
304 2017-01-17T18:55:07  *** morph has left #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2017-01-17T18:55:29  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #9569: Setting -blocksonly sets -maxmempool to zero. (master...blocksonlynomempoolsharing) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9569
306 2017-01-17T18:59:15  *** isle2983 has quit IRC
307 2017-01-17T19:09:09  *** isle2983 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
308 2017-01-17T19:11:21  *** waxwing has quit IRC
309 2017-01-17T19:13:53  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
310 2017-01-17T19:27:37  *** isle2983 has quit IRC
311 2017-01-17T19:30:13  *** wasi has quit IRC
312 2017-01-17T19:30:36  *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2017-01-17T19:31:28  *** isle2983 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
314 2017-01-17T19:51:26  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
315 2017-01-17T19:52:16  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2017-01-17T19:52:17  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
317 2017-01-17T19:59:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
318 2017-01-17T20:15:48  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2017-01-17T20:26:05  *** celsosouza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
320 2017-01-17T20:36:41  *** moli_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2017-01-17T20:37:04  <wumpus> BlueMatt: no, we've not frozen yet, that's when we split off the 0.14 branch
322 2017-01-17T20:38:10  *** Sosumi has quit IRC
323 2017-01-17T20:39:10  <BlueMatt> wumpus: oh, I'm confused now...the release schedule says feature freeze today, branch in feb
324 2017-01-17T20:40:53  <wumpus> BlueMatt: I'm confused apaprently, yes branch is before first -rc, it has been the other way around but it means a lot of more backporting so this is okay
325 2017-01-17T20:44:06  <wumpus> the only other freeze there is today is "translation string freeze", but that makes little sense without feature freeze
326 2017-01-17T20:44:47  <wumpus> let's move the feature freeze (and translation freeze) to thursday
327 2017-01-17T20:46:24  <BlueMatt> my pending list is #8456, #9294 # 9499 and #9535...of those I believe only 9499 has string changes
328 2017-01-17T20:46:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8456 | [RPC] Simplified bumpfee command. by mrbandrews · Pull Request #8456 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
329 2017-01-17T20:46:32  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9294 | Use internal HD chain for change outputs (hd split) by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9294 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
330 2017-01-17T20:46:34  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9535 | Split CNode::cs_vSend: message processing and message sending by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9535 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
331 2017-01-17T20:47:06  <BlueMatt> I dont think anything else is reasonably gonna make a feature freeze
332 2017-01-17T20:47:17  <BlueMatt> so we could also just call translation string freeze when #9499 is merged
333 2017-01-17T20:47:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9499 | Use recent-rejects, orphans, and recently-replaced txn for compact-block-reconstruction by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9499 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
334 2017-01-17T20:47:36  <BlueMatt> (rpc help text is not translated, correct?)
335 2017-01-17T20:47:39  <wumpus> sounds good to me
336 2017-01-17T20:47:43  <wumpus> no, rpc help is not translated
337 2017-01-17T20:47:48  <BlueMatt> ok, good
338 2017-01-17T20:48:44  <wumpus> 9535 isn't even tagged for 0.14.0?!
339 2017-01-17T20:49:00  <BlueMatt> no, but is too trivial and big win for me to not include in my list :p
340 2017-01-17T20:49:29  <BlueMatt> but if it slips thats ok
341 2017-01-17T20:49:31  <wumpus> I think we should focus on the current list, there's still 6 things on there
342 2017-01-17T20:49:38  <BlueMatt> as long as 9499 doesnt
343 2017-01-17T20:49:43  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.14.0
344 2017-01-17T20:49:45  <BlueMatt> half of the current list is bugfixes
345 2017-01-17T20:49:54  <BlueMatt> of which there are several more coming (see issues tagged for 14)
346 2017-01-17T20:50:15  * BlueMatt goes back to fixing #9148
347 2017-01-17T20:50:16  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9148 | Wallet RPCs can return stale info due to ProcessNewBlock Race · Issue #9148 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
348 2017-01-17T20:50:35  <BlueMatt> which is nontrivial :(
349 2017-01-17T20:50:35  <wumpus> bumpfee, internal hd chain, fundrawtransaction, improve progress display are all features I'd say
350 2017-01-17T20:50:48  <BlueMatt> oh fuck, how did i miss the display one
351 2017-01-17T20:51:01  <BlueMatt> no, the fundraw one is def a bugfix
352 2017-01-17T20:51:05  <wumpus> exclude RBF replacement and recent-rejects seem bugfixes
353 2017-01-17T20:51:16  <BlueMatt> recent-rejects is more a feature
354 2017-01-17T20:51:20  <wumpus> ok
355 2017-01-17T20:51:52  <BlueMatt> without the fundarw one it re-uses change addresses
356 2017-01-17T20:52:00  <BlueMatt> which is very not so good
357 2017-01-17T20:52:20  <BlueMatt> fuck, jonasschnelli #9377 needs rebase
358 2017-01-17T20:52:21  <wumpus> I slotted it as feature as it adds to the RPC API
359 2017-01-17T20:52:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9377 | fundrawtransaction: Keep change-output keys by default, make it optional by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9377 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
360 2017-01-17T20:52:41  <BlueMatt> oh it does add
361 2017-01-17T20:52:41  <wumpus> anyhow it's important to get in that's for sure
362 2017-01-17T20:52:49  <BlueMatt> hum, we could probably implement it more cleanly
363 2017-01-17T20:52:58  <BlueMatt> well, cleanly meaning less diff
364 2017-01-17T20:53:01  <BlueMatt> but, yea, needs to happen for 14
365 2017-01-17T20:53:07  <wumpus> is there time for that and still review the stuff before 0.14?
366 2017-01-17T20:53:31  <BlueMatt> my concern for 14 isnt the open stuff, its the bugs that need fixing that arent even pr'ed yet
367 2017-01-17T20:53:43  <BlueMatt> eg #9148 is a serious issue and the fix is not tiny
368 2017-01-17T20:53:44  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9148 | Wallet RPCs can return stale info due to ProcessNewBlock Race · Issue #9148 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
369 2017-01-17T20:53:48  <wumpus> the diff for #9377 is not that large
370 2017-01-17T20:53:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9377 | fundrawtransaction: Keep change-output keys by default, make it optional by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9377 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
371 2017-01-17T20:54:01  <BlueMatt> yea, I'm not too worried about that one, will review soon
372 2017-01-17T20:54:47  <BlueMatt> I also plan to do a helgrind run again this or next week, whenever we decide which net pulls will make it, which is gonna result in a nontrivial number of "Convert X to std::atomic" commits
373 2017-01-17T20:55:56  <BlueMatt> the walletnotify one (#9479 / $9371) is also gonna take some work
374 2017-01-17T20:55:57  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9479 | An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
375 2017-01-17T20:56:09  *** celsosouza has quit IRC
376 2017-01-17T20:56:21  <BlueMatt> but i havent dug into that one as of yet
377 2017-01-17T20:56:27  <BlueMatt> morcos and y'all seem on it
378 2017-01-17T20:57:59  <BlueMatt> ok, so string freeze is whenever #9499 and #9461 make it, otherwise when feature freeze happens
379 2017-01-17T20:58:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9499 | Use recent-rejects, orphans, and recently-replaced txn for compact-block-reconstruction by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9499 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
380 2017-01-17T20:58:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9461 | [Qt] Improve progress display during headers-sync and peer-finding by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9461 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
381 2017-01-17T20:58:09  *** handlex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382 2017-01-17T20:58:15  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: can you fix the outstanding comments on #9461?
383 2017-01-17T20:58:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9461 | [Qt] Improve progress display during headers-sync and peer-finding by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9461 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
384 2017-01-17T21:05:38  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
385 2017-01-17T21:10:35  *** waxwing has quit IRC
386 2017-01-17T21:25:25  <BlueMatt> 'tf
387 2017-01-17T21:25:47  <BlueMatt> so I'm pretty sure, right now, if you receive a coinbase payout in a block, turn off your node, and then restart without checkblocks, your payout will not display
388 2017-01-17T21:26:23  <BlueMatt> because no NotifyTransactionChanged will ever fire to the gui
389 2017-01-17T21:27:16  <BlueMatt> i mean super edge-case-y but still
390 2017-01-17T21:32:14  <sipa> is that a recent regression?
391 2017-01-17T21:33:29  <BlueMatt> looks super old
392 2017-01-17T21:33:33  <BlueMatt> but didnt check
393 2017-01-17T21:33:39  <BlueMatt> restarting gui will fix it, though, afaict
394 2017-01-17T22:12:53  *** handlex has quit IRC
395 2017-01-17T22:13:46  *** handlex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
396 2017-01-17T22:29:38  *** handlex has quit IRC
397 2017-01-17T22:39:05  *** jannes has quit IRC
398 2017-01-17T23:08:56  *** aalex has quit IRC
399 2017-01-17T23:18:28  *** handlex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
400 2017-01-17T23:51:34  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
401 2017-01-17T23:53:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #9570: Block Wallet RPCs until wallet is synced to our current chain (master...2017-01-fix-wallet-rpc-stale) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9570
402 2017-01-17T23:56:53  <gmaxwell> I thought the fundraw change change made it in already. darn.
403 2017-01-17T23:59:08  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev