12017-10-24T00:01:02  *** BashCo has quit IRC
  22017-10-24T00:20:04  *** goatpig has quit IRC
  32017-10-24T00:34:14  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
  42017-10-24T00:34:38  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52017-10-24T00:48:47  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62017-10-24T00:51:55  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  72017-10-24T01:01:19  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82017-10-24T01:08:50  *** william has quit IRC
  92017-10-24T01:09:23  *** william has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102017-10-24T01:11:38  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112017-10-24T01:12:53  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122017-10-24T01:13:21  *** william has quit IRC
 132017-10-24T01:13:50  *** william has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142017-10-24T01:20:56  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 152017-10-24T01:26:43  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162017-10-24T01:29:13  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 172017-10-24T01:33:17  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182017-10-24T01:38:41  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
 192017-10-24T01:39:39  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 202017-10-24T01:47:37  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 212017-10-24T01:51:29  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 222017-10-24T01:58:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232017-10-24T02:02:19  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242017-10-24T02:06:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 252017-10-24T02:08:56  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 262017-10-24T02:09:04  *** Swang007 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 272017-10-24T02:09:18  *** Swang007 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 282017-10-24T02:13:09  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 292017-10-24T02:20:17  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302017-10-24T02:29:21  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 312017-10-24T02:30:45  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 322017-10-24T02:32:16  *** jjitl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332017-10-24T02:35:25  <mryandao> hey, my bitcoind just crashed while its processing datadir, i attached gdb to the process and saw the following system call.
 342017-10-24T02:35:28  <mryandao> __pthread_disable_asynccancel () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/cancellation.S:88
 352017-10-24T02:35:31  <mryandao> 88	../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/cancellation.S: No such file or directory.
 362017-10-24T02:35:34  <mryandao> is this the right place to report this?
 372017-10-24T02:44:17  *** wxss has quit IRC
 382017-10-24T02:46:21  *** jjitl_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392017-10-24T02:47:40  *** jjitl_ has quit IRC
 402017-10-24T02:47:55  *** jjitl_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 412017-10-24T02:49:46  <achow101> mryandao: make an issue
 422017-10-24T02:50:46  *** jjitl has quit IRC
 432017-10-24T02:52:20  <mryandao> ok
 442017-10-24T02:52:35  <mryandao> i'll run bitcoind again and see if crashes again
 452017-10-24T02:54:03  *** jjitl_ has quit IRC
 462017-10-24T03:02:24  *** jjitl_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472017-10-24T03:09:49  *** jjitl_ has quit IRC
 482017-10-24T03:14:42  *** uneeb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492017-10-24T03:16:44  *** uneeb has quit IRC
 502017-10-24T03:19:02  *** harrymm has quit IRC
 512017-10-24T03:32:43  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 522017-10-24T03:59:53  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532017-10-24T04:28:41  *** blobby has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542017-10-24T04:31:47  *** blobby has quit IRC
 552017-10-24T05:02:15  *** geezas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 562017-10-24T05:12:32  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 572017-10-24T05:31:16  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582017-10-24T05:36:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 592017-10-24T05:37:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602017-10-24T05:55:20  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 612017-10-24T05:56:07  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 622017-10-24T05:59:48  *** warhead has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632017-10-24T06:19:36  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 642017-10-24T06:21:15  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 652017-10-24T06:24:53  *** warhead has quit IRC
 662017-10-24T06:24:54  <gmaxwell> in #11534, is there a reason to use connect time rather than highest node id?
 672017-10-24T06:24:55  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11534 | Evict outbound peers if tip is stale by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11534 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 682017-10-24T06:25:17  <gmaxwell> node ID should be monotone and increasing, so it should if anything be a better latest peer criteria than connect time.
 692017-10-24T06:26:34  *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 702017-10-24T06:33:49  *** dumnut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 712017-10-24T07:00:49  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 722017-10-24T07:08:14  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732017-10-24T07:12:25  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742017-10-24T07:13:04  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 752017-10-24T07:37:50  *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762017-10-24T07:57:41  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 772017-10-24T08:11:47  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782017-10-24T08:12:11  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 792017-10-24T08:12:42  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 802017-10-24T08:13:03  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
 812017-10-24T08:14:27  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 822017-10-24T08:15:02  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 832017-10-24T08:21:32  *** arubi has quit IRC
 842017-10-24T08:23:34  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852017-10-24T08:37:24  *** vicenteH` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862017-10-24T08:38:35  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 872017-10-24T08:38:57  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
 882017-10-24T08:39:08  *** vicenteH` is now known as vicenteH
 892017-10-24T08:42:23  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
 902017-10-24T08:43:04  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912017-10-24T09:04:35  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922017-10-24T09:07:56  *** promag has quit IRC
 932017-10-24T09:12:12  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 942017-10-24T09:17:47  *** xxxxxxx_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 952017-10-24T09:23:50  *** william has quit IRC
 962017-10-24T09:24:25  *** william has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 972017-10-24T09:28:21  *** william has quit IRC
 982017-10-24T09:28:55  *** william has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992017-10-24T09:33:00  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
1002017-10-24T09:34:30  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-10-24T09:35:47  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1022017-10-24T09:36:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1032017-10-24T09:36:18  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042017-10-24T09:37:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052017-10-24T09:49:00  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-10-24T09:50:46  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072017-10-24T09:58:25  *** dabura667_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082017-10-24T09:58:27  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
1092017-10-24T10:08:39  *** Alkhara has quit IRC
1102017-10-24T10:08:55  *** Alkhara has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112017-10-24T10:22:41  *** dabura667_ has quit IRC
1122017-10-24T10:25:43  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132017-10-24T10:38:54  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1142017-10-24T10:39:25  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152017-10-24T10:41:17  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
1162017-10-24T10:56:48  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
1172017-10-24T10:57:12  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182017-10-24T11:00:06  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192017-10-24T11:04:13  *** m8tion has quit IRC
1202017-10-24T11:04:48  *** timothy has quit IRC
1212017-10-24T11:08:33  *** william has quit IRC
1222017-10-24T11:08:53  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232017-10-24T11:09:49  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242017-10-24T11:12:50  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-10-24T11:13:09  *** rafalcpp_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262017-10-24T11:15:08  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
1272017-10-24T11:22:56  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
1282017-10-24T11:30:00  *** str4d has quit IRC
1292017-10-24T11:47:06  *** cxr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302017-10-24T11:49:05  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: thanks, that sounds better
1312017-10-24T11:49:18  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1322017-10-24T11:49:44  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332017-10-24T11:49:47  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: i thought of another problem with that patch, that i'm not sure how to best address
1342017-10-24T11:49:50  *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352017-10-24T11:50:24  *** cxr has quit IRC
1362017-10-24T11:50:28  <sdaftuar> it seems suboptimal to disconnect a peer that hasn't been connected very long -- eg perhaps your tip is stale, but the peer you're choosing to evict is one you just connected to
1372017-10-24T11:50:41  *** cxr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382017-10-24T11:51:37  <sipa> sdaftuar: years ago i experimented with a outbound connection rotation system, which kicked just based on chances that depend on connection time
1392017-10-24T11:51:39  <sdaftuar> or, perhaps your network was down for a few hours (say, you're running on a laptop) and then when you start up, you detect a stale tip -- so you immediately flag one of your initial 8 peers for eviction, for basically no good reason
1402017-10-24T11:52:18  <sipa> i believe a good approach was (by simulations, but i've lost all the code so it's hard to reproduce) to make the chance to disconnect proportional to time_connected^-0.8
1412017-10-24T11:53:57  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1422017-10-24T11:54:23  <sipa> sdaftuar: well if we're considering something like peer rotation anyway (at least, i am), then occasionally randomly disconnecting someone for no reason isn't too bad
1432017-10-24T11:54:24  <sdaftuar> sipa: i haven't given a ton of thought to how to measure success/failure of general-purpose algorithms like that...
1442017-10-24T11:54:54  <sipa> at least if it only happens occasionally
1452017-10-24T11:55:18  <sdaftuar> ah, ok
1462017-10-24T11:55:42  <sdaftuar> well, i think my PR won't behave *terribly*, under the assumption that it's okay for an occasional spurious disconnect
1472017-10-24T11:55:49  *** cxr has quit IRC
1482017-10-24T11:55:51  <sdaftuar> though it could certainly use testing
1492017-10-24T11:56:07  <sipa> and in general, your most recent connection is the least likely peer to be your best
1502017-10-24T11:56:55  <sdaftuar> right, agreed.  i think my PR does have an edge-case bug, where eg your first peer could be the one disconnected (in the situation where your network is down, then comes back up, and you briefly have just one peer that is fully connected--
1512017-10-24T11:56:57  <sipa> so if we're aiming for simplicity, i don't think it'll be terrible under any circumstances
1522017-10-24T11:57:11  <sdaftuar> it could be flagged for eviction)
1532017-10-24T11:58:10  <sdaftuar> i was considering another approach to the same problem, where i just connect outbound to a 9th peer when the tip looks like it might be stale, and then at some point after that disconnect one
1542017-10-24T11:58:19  <sdaftuar> with the idea that if no new info was learned from the 9th, then it should be the one disconnected
1552017-10-24T11:58:56  <sdaftuar> i think that approach has the advantage of (a) being able to trigger more often, because it seems safer to connect to an extra peer than disconnect an existing one, so you can test for stale-ness with less conservatism
1562017-10-24T11:59:12  <sipa> right
1572017-10-24T11:59:23  <sdaftuar> and (b) it seems like the outbound peer selection logic will perform better if you connect to a new peer before disconnecting an old peer (due to the netgroup diversity requirement? if i  understand it right)
1582017-10-24T11:59:51  <sdaftuar> but i haven't quite worked out the implementation details yet
1592017-10-24T12:08:40  *** cxr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602017-10-24T12:13:30  *** promag has quit IRC
1612017-10-24T12:20:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #11552: Improve wallet-accounts test (master...pr/acctt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11552
1622017-10-24T12:22:57  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1632017-10-24T12:23:36  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642017-10-24T12:26:09  *** str4d has quit IRC
1652017-10-24T12:28:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662017-10-24T12:29:25  *** promag has quit IRC
1672017-10-24T12:30:35  *** way has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682017-10-24T12:33:27  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692017-10-24T12:36:05  *** way has quit IRC
1702017-10-24T12:36:42  *** promag has quit IRC
1712017-10-24T12:48:04  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722017-10-24T12:54:46  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
1732017-10-24T12:55:46  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742017-10-24T12:56:03  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752017-10-24T12:58:09  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762017-10-24T13:10:30  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772017-10-24T13:12:11  *** promag has quit IRC
1782017-10-24T13:14:24  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1792017-10-24T13:29:38  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802017-10-24T13:32:04  *** timothy has quit IRC
1812017-10-24T13:42:44  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1822017-10-24T13:44:41  *** jouke has quit IRC
1832017-10-24T13:55:09  <aj> jtimon: hmm, googling old issues doesn't seem like there's much consensus on changing RPC from decimal BTC values? #9855 was the most recent i saw, i think
1842017-10-24T13:55:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9855 | RPC: Use integer satoshis instead BTC with decimals by jtimon · Pull Request #9855 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1852017-10-24T13:57:06  <jtimon> perhaps that's a good topic for the next meeting
1862017-10-24T13:57:54  <jtimon> it was my understanding that everybody considered using BTC instead of satoshis a mistake, but perhaps it's just me and I'm just assuming the opinions of others
1872017-10-24T13:58:15  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
1882017-10-24T14:00:39  <aj> jtimon: if i'm understanding what they're saying, sipa and wumpus seem to think string vs number is more important than btc vs satoshi
1892017-10-24T14:01:02  <aj> jtimon: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3759/commits/f3f8460fe51be719231612a921dd37af638df46a seems like a good idea to me?
1902017-10-24T14:01:39  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
1912017-10-24T14:10:26  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922017-10-24T14:15:27  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932017-10-24T14:17:39  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942017-10-24T14:29:42  *** promag has quit IRC
1952017-10-24T14:44:24  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962017-10-24T14:51:39  *** promag has quit IRC
1972017-10-24T14:54:16  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982017-10-24T15:09:10  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992017-10-24T15:31:34  *** promag has quit IRC
2002017-10-24T15:34:21  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2012017-10-24T16:12:38  *** dumnut has quit IRC
2022017-10-24T16:13:09  *** Alkhara has quit IRC
2032017-10-24T16:16:29  *** timothy has quit IRC
2042017-10-24T16:17:59  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2052017-10-24T16:21:18  *** pierre_rochard has quit IRC
2062017-10-24T16:27:21  *** pigeons has quit IRC
2072017-10-24T16:27:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082017-10-24T16:29:15  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2092017-10-24T16:31:32  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102017-10-24T16:32:35  *** gaf_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112017-10-24T16:34:37  <jtimon> aj: I also tried https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9855 but it wasn't very well received
2122017-10-24T16:35:20  <jtimon> also I think string vs numbers is more important when you have decimals. for integer satoshis I don't think anyone has a problem with them being numbers
2132017-10-24T16:35:28  <jtimon> perhaps I'm wrong there too, not sure
2142017-10-24T16:36:01  <jtimon> but for the getblockstats pr, I really think using integer satoshis is the right thing to do
2152017-10-24T16:36:15  <jtimon> or the best option
2162017-10-24T16:52:04  *** mess110 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172017-10-24T17:02:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Varunram opened pull request #11553: [P2P] Throw Warning if -peerbloomfilters is enabled (master...peerfilters) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11553
2182017-10-24T17:03:56  <Varunram> Hey guys! This is my first PR, please pardon me if I've done something wrong or haven't abided by any rules. Looking forward to your comments :)
2192017-10-24T17:07:13  *** StopAndDecrypt__ is now known as StopAndDecrypt
2202017-10-24T17:10:45  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212017-10-24T17:31:11  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
2222017-10-24T17:35:22  *** xinxi has quit IRC
2232017-10-24T17:35:56  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-10-24T17:38:05  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
2252017-10-24T17:38:45  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262017-10-24T17:47:47  *** nik_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272017-10-24T18:05:00  *** ertwro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282017-10-24T18:05:03  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292017-10-24T18:12:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #11554: Sanity-check script sizes in bitcoin-tx (master...2017-10-bitcoin-tx-script-sizes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11554
2302017-10-24T18:14:34  <BlueMatt> Varunram: heh, thanks for the pr, though sadly I dont think we can do that yet :(
2312017-10-24T18:15:37  <BlueMatt> Varunram: note that the -peerbloomfilters option is mostly to prevent dos issues for nodes which cannot take the potential latency increases, and not to encourage people to stop providing bloom filters until we have a viable alternative :/
2322017-10-24T18:18:47  <Varunram> BlueMatt: haha, no worries :) I was going through the issues with "good first issue" labels on them and this seemed to be a good place to start. And yeah, we certainly don't want people to stop providing bloom filters, that would take a hit on SPV clients as a whole
2332017-10-24T18:19:20  <BlueMatt> heh, yea, maybe we should be better about tags...
2342017-10-24T18:19:28  <BlueMatt> someone should probably remove the "good first issue" tag there....
2352017-10-24T18:19:35  <Varunram> I'll rummage through the issues repo and contribute something more useful, meanwhile do I close the PR or?
2362017-10-24T18:20:18  <BlueMatt> I mean you dont have to, but it'll sit for 6/12 months if you dont "waiting on someone to add a viable alternative"....
2372017-10-24T18:20:18  <Varunram> I had a slight notion that it might be controversial, but gave it a shot (yolo lol)
2382017-10-24T18:20:21  <BlueMatt> so probably easier to...
2392017-10-24T18:21:38  <Varunram> got it, thanks!
2402017-10-24T18:21:50  *** xinxi has quit IRC
2412017-10-24T18:22:24  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422017-10-24T18:23:16  *** ertwro has quit IRC
2432017-10-24T18:23:35  *** seone has quit IRC
2442017-10-24T18:23:44  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452017-10-24T18:23:44  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
2462017-10-24T18:23:44  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472017-10-24T18:25:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Varunram closed pull request #11553: [P2P] Throw Warning if -peerbloomfilters is enabled (master...peerfilters) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11553
2482017-10-24T18:29:25  <jb55> seconded on adding more good first issue tags, I'm also interested in getting my feet wet..
2492017-10-24T19:07:23  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502017-10-24T19:19:19  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512017-10-24T19:33:16  *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522017-10-24T19:37:15  <cfields> sdaftuar: sorry for the late review
2532017-10-24T19:38:38  * luke-jr wonders why dns seeder added a second copy of the service bits
2542017-10-24T19:39:32  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552017-10-24T19:59:24  <luke-jr> dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org is now servicebit-filter-enabled
2562017-10-24T19:59:35  *** benji has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572017-10-24T19:59:45  <sdaftuar> cfields: thanks for taking a look!
2582017-10-24T19:59:49  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-10-24T19:59:59  *** benji is now known as Guest51752
2602017-10-24T20:00:46  <cfields> sdaftuar: don't kill me for that last comment... I know 11534 was my suggestion :\
2612017-10-24T20:02:05  <sdaftuar> no problem, thanks for thinking about it.  not sure if you saw the scrollback, but i'm actually working on an alternate implementation where we'd add a new peer first, and then figure out who to disconnect
2622017-10-24T20:02:30  <sdaftuar> i *think* that will turn out to be simpler... but the code isn't done yet, so too early for me to be sure
2632017-10-24T20:02:42  <sdaftuar> testing this stuff is all awful of course :(
2642017-10-24T20:04:05  <sdaftuar> anyway i think #11490 is closer to done, so i'll address your comments there and hopefully we can get some final acks soon
2652017-10-24T20:04:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11490 | Disconnect from outbound peers with bad headers chains by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11490 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2662017-10-24T20:04:18  <cfields> no, i didn't see that
2672017-10-24T20:04:22  <cfields> reading
2682017-10-24T20:07:06  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: I like adding a new peer first; then we won't potentially spend a long time with one fewer peer.
2692017-10-24T20:07:26  <cfields> I see. The idea being that you may disconnect a node just to connect to his neighbor. But if you have a new connection first, you can make a better decision
2702017-10-24T20:08:08  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
2712017-10-24T20:08:17  <sdaftuar> cfields: yeah.  i don't know how compelling that reasoning is, but that plus not being able to be more aggressive about checking whether your tip is stale both seem like good reasons
2722017-10-24T20:08:35  <sdaftuar> and what gmaxwell said ^
2732017-10-24T20:11:57  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742017-10-24T20:21:41  <gmaxwell> this was, fwiw, how I always envisioned outbound rotation working, temporarily allowing one extra peer, then deciding which one to axe after you've talked to the new one.
2752017-10-24T20:36:22  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
2762017-10-24T20:46:04  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772017-10-24T20:47:35  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
2782017-10-24T20:48:22  *** riemann has quit IRC
2792017-10-24T20:53:29  *** promag has quit IRC
2802017-10-24T20:56:06  <cfields> sdaftuar: so should i let #11534 rest until you've tried out your new approach?
2812017-10-24T20:56:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11534 | Evict outbound peers if tip is stale by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11534 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2822017-10-24T20:57:27  <sdaftuar> cfields: yeah maybe give me another day or so to try to get a new approach working, and then we can compare and see which looks more viable?
2832017-10-24T20:57:35  <cfields> ok, np
2842017-10-24T20:57:36  <sdaftuar> so you don't waste your time on an approach we abandon
2852017-10-24T20:59:36  <cfields> also, if our p2p was more spec'd out, I'd grumpily ask for a bip for #11490. But I guess it's not worth it since we already make a bunch of assumptions.
2862017-10-24T20:59:38  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11490 | Disconnect from outbound peers with bad headers chains by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11490 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2872017-10-24T21:00:32  <sdaftuar> i'm not averse to documentation, but do you think it needs a bip?  i feel like peer selection is something that doesn't really require coordination across implementations
2882017-10-24T21:01:35  <cfields> nah, i don't think it's really needed
2892017-10-24T21:02:04  <cfields> not the peer selection though, the "you must send MAX_HEADERS_RESULTS or be disconnected" rule.
2902017-10-24T21:02:33  <sdaftuar> oh, i forgot about that
2912017-10-24T21:03:18  <gmaxwell> We alrady have a requirement for the max results, since our headers syncinc chaining depends on it, no?
2922017-10-24T21:03:36  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: yeah, that's basically how i looked at it
2932017-10-24T21:04:26  <sdaftuar> i think matt observed that if we added a one-off getheaders message (eg with a hashstop) before we'd completed chain sync from a peer for some reason, then that would interact badly with the new logic
2942017-10-24T21:04:40  <gmaxwell> since it's automatic outbound only it wouldn't harm monitoring tools or such that don't really implement the protocol correctly.
2952017-10-24T21:04:42  <sdaftuar> but we don't do that...  and i don't know why we would
2962017-10-24T21:04:59  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972017-10-24T21:05:03  <cfields> ah, so it does
2982017-10-24T21:08:57  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2992017-10-24T21:10:59  *** mess110 has quit IRC
3002017-10-24T21:12:01  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
3012017-10-24T21:20:29  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022017-10-24T21:32:18  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: another point why its important that we don't evict half our outbound peers in 11490.  Consider, say there is a new softfork we don't know about. At the moment, a chain violating it is a block ahead.  We don't want the non-upgraded network to completely partition the upgraded network, because eventually the upgraded network will get ahead and we will switch to it.
3032017-10-24T21:32:53  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: great point.  i should add a comment
3042017-10-24T21:33:46  <sdaftuar> hmm, do you think protecting the first 4 who give us headers is reasonable then?
3052017-10-24T21:34:01  <sdaftuar> (afk, back later)
3062017-10-24T21:37:56  <BlueMatt> google translate appears to think #11555 is the guy asking how to create his own altcoin....someone wanna close it?
3072017-10-24T21:37:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11555 | ПОМОГИТЕ!!!!!!! · Issue #11555 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3082017-10-24T21:39:13  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: yes, probably.
3092017-10-24T21:39:46  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: to be fair on my point, inbound connections would heal the partition, but I feel better if we can justify the behavior even in the impossible network of only hosts with outbound connections.
3102017-10-24T21:40:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3112017-10-24T21:48:44  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122017-10-24T21:51:08  *** william has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3132017-10-24T21:58:20  <meshcollider> BlueMatt: heh I like his/Google's phrasing, "altcoin come alive and go free swimming"
3142017-10-24T21:59:43  *** str4d_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3152017-10-24T22:02:01  *** str4d has quit IRC
3162017-10-24T22:02:03  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
3172017-10-24T22:02:15  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3182017-10-24T22:05:27  <esotericnonsense> does anyone have a good way to reproduce slow RPC behaviour? all I can think of at the moment is continually resyncing which doesn't seem like a good idea for my poor SSD. perhaps running a seperate thread that hits RPC with heavy queries over and over?
3192017-10-24T22:06:35  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3202017-10-24T22:07:17  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
3212017-10-24T22:08:15  *** riemann has quit IRC
3222017-10-24T22:11:21  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3232017-10-24T22:11:21  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3242017-10-24T22:13:57  *** william is now known as Bitnet
3252017-10-24T22:14:38  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3262017-10-24T22:21:07  *** spinza has quit IRC
3272017-10-24T22:21:20  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3282017-10-24T22:31:29  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292017-10-24T22:34:59  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3302017-10-24T22:35:39  <aj> jtimon: i think the drawback for numbers vs strings is that even without a decimal point, "integers" are treated as doubles in javascript which makes it ambiguous at best in json generally
3312017-10-24T22:38:01  <gmaxwell> some json implementations manage to use floats for numbers too! :(
3322017-10-24T22:38:27  <jtimon> aj: yeah, perhaps all data in getblocksstats should be returned as strings, I still prefer satoshis over in BTC in that case
3332017-10-24T22:38:56  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
3342017-10-24T22:41:25  <jb55> I find myself using sed to wrap numbers in strings before I process them with jq...
3352017-10-24T22:43:44  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
3362017-10-24T22:44:19  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372017-10-24T22:46:35  <jtimon> gmaxwell: so what do you think should be done for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10757 ? all string satoshis, all string BTC ?
3382017-10-24T22:47:16  *** promag has quit IRC
3392017-10-24T22:51:05  <jtimon> with that PR, I'm also kind of stuck with testing...I need to add at least one segwit tx to test some of the functionality, but some size and feerate functionality is currently not being tested due to sigs not being deterministic in size,I thought about putting hardcoded private keys in the test, but nobody confirmed that it makes any sense
3402017-10-24T22:59:14  *** str4d_ has quit IRC
3412017-10-24T22:59:25  *** geezas has quit IRC
3422017-10-24T22:59:27  <jb55> jtimon: wouldn't it make more sense to just to dump N verbose blocks and build analysis tools externally? I guess that would be a bit slower...
3432017-10-24T23:04:57  <jtimon> jb55: mhmm, I'm talking about the tests, but yeah, didn't thought about that...hardcoded blocks should do the trick and additionally also solve any potential concern with coin selection being non deterministic too, in case more complex tests are needed in the future. Great suggestion, now I feel bad about not thinking about it myself, but good about you not waiting for me to discover that possibility on my own
3442017-10-24T23:06:17  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
3452017-10-24T23:06:33  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
3462017-10-24T23:07:51  *** Bitnet is now known as Torrent
3472017-10-24T23:08:19  <jb55> just came to mind because I was trying to write a script that gave me the average block times the other day...
3482017-10-24T23:11:19  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492017-10-24T23:13:04  <jtimon> are there any other tests that use hardcoded blocks that I can copy from ? I guess the answer is no since https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8994 which changes the genesis block for all functional tests is passing, but it was recently brought to my attention that  hardcoding txs (including coinbases) should be enough even to construct a compatible even with a hf that completely changes the proof of work rules from genesis
3502017-10-24T23:13:04  <jtimon> block (such as regtest/custom)  [isn't rusty around? it was him who reminded me in a completely unrelated conversation, I vaguely remind having known this before, or perhaps was just a deja vu]
3512017-10-24T23:15:14  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
3522017-10-24T23:16:21  <jtimon> or perhaps it's been too long since last time I tried the extended tests (including pruning)...
3532017-10-24T23:16:47  <jtimon> (for that PR)
3542017-10-24T23:19:20  <jtimon> I'll stop overtly and subconsciously review begging now...
3552017-10-24T23:42:17  *** owowo has quit IRC
3562017-10-24T23:44:35  *** nik_ has quit IRC
3572017-10-24T23:47:17  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582017-10-24T23:47:17  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3592017-10-24T23:54:12  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev