12019-09-05T00:00:02 *** rknLA1 has quit IRC
22019-09-05T00:02:16 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
32019-09-05T00:02:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8e00a6855240...761fe07ba9b5
42019-09-05T00:02:17 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 490da63 Kristaps Kaupe: Make lint-includes.sh work from any directory
52019-09-05T00:02:17 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 761fe07 MarcoFalke: Merge #16768: test: Make lint-includes.sh work from any directory
62019-09-05T00:02:19 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
72019-09-05T00:03:21 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82019-09-05T00:03:21 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #16768: test: Make lint-includes.sh work from any directory (master...lint-includes-anydir) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16768
92019-09-05T00:03:24 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
102019-09-05T00:04:41 <midnightmagic> ah. so the code isn't old. it's pre-warning in gcc saying we're doing it right now, lucky us. what a bizarre warning to emit.
112019-09-05T00:07:35 <sipa> if you're linking pre-gcc-7.1 and gcc-7.1 compiled code, things will break
122019-09-05T00:07:44 <sipa> the compiler can't know whether you're doing that or not
132019-09-05T00:07:49 <sipa> generally ABIs don't change like that
142019-09-05T00:19:37 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152019-09-05T00:25:21 *** xzytrewq has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162019-09-05T00:35:36 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
172019-09-05T00:40:23 <midnightmagic> Ah, an ABI thing. Okay less weird to me. Thank you.
182019-09-05T00:41:57 *** xzytrewq has quit IRC
192019-09-05T00:44:35 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202019-09-05T00:44:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 5 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/761fe07ba9b5...45be44cce4fa
212019-09-05T00:44:37 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b21680b Ben Woosley: test/contrib: Fix invalid escapes in regex strings
222019-09-05T00:44:38 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8389207 Ben Woosley: lint: Disable flake8 W504 warning
232019-09-05T00:44:40 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0ef0e51 Ben Woosley: lint: Bump flake8 to 3.7.8
242019-09-05T00:44:41 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
252019-09-05T00:45:00 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262019-09-05T00:45:00 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15257: Scripts and tools: Bump flake8 to 3.7.8 (master...flake-36) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15257
272019-09-05T00:45:06 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
282019-09-05T00:47:49 *** Chameleon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292019-09-05T01:06:18 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
302019-09-05T01:12:40 *** Highway61 has quit IRC
312019-09-05T01:25:39 *** lightlike has quit IRC
322019-09-05T01:38:11 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332019-09-05T01:50:03 *** xzytrewq has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342019-09-05T02:05:40 *** emilengler_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352019-09-05T02:09:13 *** emilengler has quit IRC
362019-09-05T02:11:34 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
372019-09-05T02:15:46 *** farmerwampum has quit IRC
382019-09-05T02:29:01 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
392019-09-05T02:29:54 *** farmerwampum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402019-09-05T02:30:07 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412019-09-05T02:30:07 *** cryptoIndio has quit IRC
422019-09-05T02:43:52 *** cryptoIndio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432019-09-05T02:50:48 *** cryptoIndio has quit IRC
442019-09-05T03:00:01 *** Chameleon has quit IRC
452019-09-05T03:00:54 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462019-09-05T03:05:28 *** ddustin has quit IRC
472019-09-05T03:08:41 <luke-jr> I don't think we use it, but just in case, GCC miscompiles PPC's hardware random to repeated values: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
482019-09-05T03:13:22 *** jcorgan_ has quit IRC
492019-09-05T03:17:11 *** iMast777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502019-09-05T03:18:49 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512019-09-05T03:26:17 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522019-09-05T03:32:00 *** IGHOR has quit IRC
532019-09-05T03:38:46 *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542019-09-05T04:09:00 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552019-09-05T04:37:56 *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562019-09-05T04:40:30 *** kcalvina_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572019-09-05T04:41:18 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
582019-09-05T04:43:05 *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
592019-09-05T04:56:29 *** fox2p_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602019-09-05T04:57:32 *** fox2p has quit IRC
612019-09-05T05:04:36 *** jcorgan has quit IRC
622019-09-05T05:09:39 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632019-09-05T05:25:34 *** astro has quit IRC
642019-09-05T05:30:52 *** astro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652019-09-05T05:44:37 *** shesek has quit IRC
662019-09-05T05:59:21 *** spinza has quit IRC
672019-09-05T06:00:02 *** iMast777 has quit IRC
682019-09-05T06:00:51 *** spinza_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692019-09-05T06:17:47 *** tomatopotato has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702019-09-05T06:38:43 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712019-09-05T06:45:05 *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722019-09-05T06:49:09 *** kcalvina_ has quit IRC
732019-09-05T07:10:52 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
742019-09-05T07:19:52 *** doesnt-code has quit IRC
752019-09-05T07:44:13 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762019-09-05T07:49:35 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772019-09-05T07:53:10 *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
782019-09-05T07:58:34 *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
792019-09-05T08:01:52 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
802019-09-05T08:09:12 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812019-09-05T08:13:52 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
822019-09-05T08:15:03 *** coinmonks has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832019-09-05T08:15:50 <coinmonks> Hey Michael, My name is gaurav,. I run Coinmonks (https://medium.com/coinmonks) publication..
842019-09-05T08:16:08 <coinmonks> I also run Coincodecap.com where we track crypto based on their Github activity
852019-09-05T08:16:51 <coinmonks> We started a series "Developers in crypto" .. we want to mention you in our blog.. and we have few question
862019-09-05T08:17:06 <coinmonks> Can you please help us with them?
872019-09-05T08:17:12 <coinmonks> Your background?
882019-09-05T08:17:20 <coinmonks> When and how you get involved in Bitcoin?
892019-09-05T08:17:26 <coinmonks> What are your main contributions on Bitcoin ecosystem?
902019-09-05T08:17:32 <coinmonks> What are new tech innovations you introduced on Bitcoin?
912019-09-05T08:17:39 <coinmonks> Any interesting story you might want to share about contributing on Bitcoin?
922019-09-05T08:26:04 <jouke> What are your private keys?
932019-09-05T08:26:47 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
942019-09-05T08:34:01 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952019-09-05T08:34:26 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962019-09-05T08:34:26 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
972019-09-05T08:35:22 <coinmonks> Shit ..I didn't realise I was typing this on general chat :)
982019-09-05T08:36:43 *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
992019-09-05T08:36:46 <wumpus> heh
1002019-09-05T08:42:40 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012019-09-05T08:43:33 *** kcalvina_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022019-09-05T08:43:33 *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
1032019-09-05T09:00:02 *** tomatopotato has quit IRC
1042019-09-05T09:16:13 *** kcalvina_ has quit IRC
1052019-09-05T09:16:29 *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062019-09-05T09:16:35 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072019-09-05T09:17:28 *** ranman1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082019-09-05T09:27:53 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1092019-09-05T09:29:11 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102019-09-05T09:35:09 *** shesek has quit IRC
1112019-09-05T09:38:00 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1122019-09-05T09:42:33 *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132019-09-05T09:42:39 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142019-09-05T09:44:18 *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
1152019-09-05T09:51:04 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1162019-09-05T09:51:49 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172019-09-05T09:57:44 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1182019-09-05T09:58:26 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
1192019-09-05T10:07:01 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202019-09-05T10:15:03 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1212019-09-05T10:31:15 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222019-09-05T10:47:03 *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232019-09-05T10:47:58 *** davec has quit IRC
1242019-09-05T10:48:33 <coinmonks> anyone from India here?
1252019-09-05T10:50:06 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262019-09-05T10:50:06 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #16806: doc: Add issue templates for bug and feature request (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16806
1272019-09-05T10:50:07 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1282019-09-05T10:55:37 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292019-09-05T10:56:53 *** shesek has quit IRC
1302019-09-05T11:14:54 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
1312019-09-05T11:29:23 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322019-09-05T11:29:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/45be44cce4fa...cbde2bc80674
1332019-09-05T11:29:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fae91a0 MarcoFalke: test: Remove incorrect and unused try-block in assert_debug_log
1342019-09-05T11:29:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cbde2bc Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #16804: test: Remove unused try-block in assert_debug_log
1352019-09-05T11:29:26 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1362019-09-05T11:30:31 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372019-09-05T11:30:31 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #16804: test: Remove unused try-block in assert_debug_log (master...1909-testFix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16804
1382019-09-05T11:30:33 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1392019-09-05T11:31:41 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402019-09-05T11:31:41 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/cbde2bc80674...5667b0d758f1
1412019-09-05T11:31:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2457aea Samuel Dobson: Assert that the HRP is lowercase in Bech32::Encode
1422019-09-05T11:31:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5667b0d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #16792: Assert that the HRP is lowercase in Bech32::Encode
1432019-09-05T11:31:44 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1442019-09-05T11:32:36 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1452019-09-05T11:32:36 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #16792: Assert that the HRP is lowercase in Bech32::Encode (master...201909_bech32_hrp_check) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16792
1462019-09-05T11:32:38 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1472019-09-05T11:32:42 *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482019-09-05T11:38:45 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1492019-09-05T11:40:47 *** coinmonks has quit IRC
1502019-09-05T11:57:59 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512019-09-05T12:00:02 *** ranman1 has quit IRC
1522019-09-05T12:11:32 *** spaced0ut has quit IRC
1532019-09-05T12:12:32 *** davec has quit IRC
1542019-09-05T12:13:16 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1552019-09-05T12:13:18 *** spaced0ut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1562019-09-05T12:17:33 *** andrea5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572019-09-05T12:20:33 *** harrigan has quit IRC
1582019-09-05T12:23:09 *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592019-09-05T12:32:28 *** promag has quit IRC
1602019-09-05T12:46:50 *** harrigan has quit IRC
1612019-09-05T13:15:09 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1622019-09-05T13:15:09 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider opened pull request #16807: Let validateaddress locate error in Bech32 address (master...201909_bech32_error_detection) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16807
1632019-09-05T13:15:11 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1642019-09-05T13:19:02 *** emilengler_ has quit IRC
1652019-09-05T13:22:10 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662019-09-05T13:28:33 *** pbase has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672019-09-05T13:29:29 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682019-09-05T13:29:31 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider pushed 5 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5667b0d758f1...5e202382a987
1692019-09-05T13:29:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a31be09 Antoine Riard: Encapsulate tx status in a Confirmation struct
1702019-09-05T13:29:32 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7e89994 Antoine Riard: Remove SyncTransaction for conflicted txn in CWallet::BlockConnected
1712019-09-05T13:29:32 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 40ede99 Antoine Riard: Modify wallet tx status if has been reorged out
1722019-09-05T13:29:35 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1732019-09-05T13:30:19 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742019-09-05T13:30:19 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider merged pull request #16624: wallet: encapsulate transactions state (master...2019-08-encapsulate-tx-state) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16624
1752019-09-05T13:30:20 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1762019-09-05T13:35:49 <meshcollider> review beg for #15450
1772019-09-05T13:35:54 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15450 | gui: Create wallet menu option by achow101 · Pull Request #15450 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1782019-09-05T13:36:16 <meshcollider> its already on high priority list
1792019-09-05T13:37:34 *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802019-09-05T13:40:02 <meshcollider> I'd like to merge it tomorrow but it'd be great to have at least one more review or tester
1812019-09-05T13:53:05 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822019-09-05T13:56:09 <jnewbery> #proposedmeetingtopic: review/merge #16704 or #16713 to remove worrying "unknown new rules activated (versionbit 1)" warning
1832019-09-05T13:56:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16704 | Dont warn about activated buried BIP 9 deployments by achow101 · Pull Request #16704 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1842019-09-05T13:56:12 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16713 | logging: Redefine CSV and segwit deployments to avoid unknown softforks warning by jnewbery · Pull Request #16713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1852019-09-05T13:58:59 *** Highway61 has quit IRC
1862019-09-05T13:59:19 *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872019-09-05T14:01:05 *** shesek has quit IRC
1882019-09-05T14:04:11 *** nullptr| has quit IRC
1892019-09-05T14:05:52 *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902019-09-05T14:09:44 *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912019-09-05T14:11:27 <fanquake> meshcollider: just make sure you check/close/merge the base PR as well. I assume itâs still the same in create wallet. Has 1 ACK I think.
1922019-09-05T14:13:57 *** mdunnio has quit IRC
1932019-09-05T14:15:16 *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942019-09-05T14:16:19 *** astro has quit IRC
1952019-09-05T14:16:19 *** mryandao has quit IRC
1962019-09-05T14:16:27 <meshcollider> fanquake: I see yeah, why is the base PR not on the high priority list as well/instead?
1972019-09-05T14:16:41 *** astro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982019-09-05T14:16:43 *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992019-09-05T14:17:13 <fanquake> meshcollider: it is
2002019-09-05T14:17:23 <fanquake> #16261
2012019-09-05T14:17:25 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16261 | gui: Refactor OpenWalletActivity by promag · Pull Request #16261 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2022019-09-05T14:18:36 <meshcollider> Oh I totally missed that, sorry
2032019-09-05T14:18:50 <meshcollider> Yeah I saw the PR just didn't see it on the list for some reason
2042019-09-05T14:23:15 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052019-09-05T14:43:32 <aj> jnewbery: https://github.com/ajtowns/bitcoin/commits/201909-unknown-softforks -- i would've thought something like that would make more sense than reinstating csv/segwit into vDeployments?
2062019-09-05T14:43:49 <aj> jnewbery: (also, shorter :)
2072019-09-05T14:45:55 <jnewbery> aj: looks good to me!
2082019-09-05T14:46:51 <aj> jnewbery: if you like it, put a PR on it? :)
2092019-09-05T14:47:01 <aj> jnewbery: i mean, feel free to merge it into your PR :)
2102019-09-05T15:00:02 *** andrea5 has quit IRC
2112019-09-05T15:01:20 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
2122019-09-05T15:02:19 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132019-09-05T15:10:48 *** behradkhodayar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142019-09-05T15:12:29 *** pbase has quit IRC
2152019-09-05T15:13:53 <jnewbery> aj: testing now
2162019-09-05T15:17:23 *** Velociraptor1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172019-09-05T15:21:06 <aj> jnewbery: thinking about it, could just set it to 0 for regtest (since no historical versionbit stuff for segwit etc needed there); which means it could be set straight after the buried heights not after -segwitheight is worked out
2182019-09-05T15:41:00 *** alko has quit IRC
2192019-09-05T15:43:36 *** alko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202019-09-05T15:44:24 <jonatack> meshcollider: re-reviewing #15450 now
2212019-09-05T15:44:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15450 | gui: Create wallet menu option by achow101 · Pull Request #15450 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2222019-09-05T15:44:37 *** alko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232019-09-05T15:53:40 *** kristapsk has quit IRC
2242019-09-05T15:57:55 *** behradkhodayar has quit IRC
2252019-09-05T15:58:12 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262019-09-05T16:00:24 *** mdunnio has quit IRC
2272019-09-05T16:03:51 *** setpill has quit IRC
2282019-09-05T16:07:47 <stevenroose> Is there already a C++ implementation of the taproot tagged hashes? I'm looking for some example values to test an implementation against.
2292019-09-05T16:12:15 <sipa> stevenroose: sure, https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/taproot/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1324L1331
2302019-09-05T16:12:21 <sipa> note that nothing about taproot is final
2312019-09-05T16:12:29 <sipa> (or even guaranteed to make it in)
2322019-09-05T16:18:35 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332019-09-05T16:19:46 *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342019-09-05T16:20:04 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2352019-09-05T16:21:22 *** doesnt-code has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2362019-09-05T16:26:36 <stevenroose> sipa: I realize, but it doesn't hurt to start experimenting with some implementation already :)
2372019-09-05T16:26:52 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
2382019-09-05T16:28:38 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
2392019-09-05T16:30:03 <sipa> of course
2402019-09-05T16:34:09 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412019-09-05T16:35:37 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2422019-09-05T16:36:35 *** Highway61 has quit IRC
2432019-09-05T16:37:27 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2442019-09-05T16:46:24 *** mdunnio has quit IRC
2452019-09-05T16:49:11 *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462019-09-05T16:50:59 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472019-09-05T16:52:57 *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482019-09-05T16:53:48 *** mdunnio has quit IRC
2492019-09-05T16:56:17 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2502019-09-05T17:00:30 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512019-09-05T17:04:53 *** promag has quit IRC
2522019-09-05T17:05:24 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532019-09-05T17:08:50 <fjahr> I would like to ask for feedback on my proposal for a rolling UTXO set hash (originally proposed by sipa) at the meeting today. If possible please take a look at my write up: https://gist.github.com/fjahr/fa4892874b090d3a4f4fccc5bafa0210
2542019-09-05T17:09:20 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552019-09-05T17:12:03 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562019-09-05T17:16:51 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572019-09-05T17:19:11 <fjahr> #proposedmeetingtopic Rolling UTXO set hash
2582019-09-05T17:22:27 *** promag has quit IRC
2592019-09-05T17:23:12 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602019-09-05T17:24:44 *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612019-09-05T17:28:55 *** promag has quit IRC
2622019-09-05T17:32:24 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632019-09-05T17:32:54 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
2642019-09-05T17:34:09 <achow101> #proposedmeetingtopic avoid loading every wallet transaction into memory
2652019-09-05T17:37:16 *** promag has quit IRC
2662019-09-05T17:41:20 <sipa> fjahr: cool!
2672019-09-05T17:58:35 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
2682019-09-05T17:58:53 <jnewbery> aj: done: #16713
2692019-09-05T17:58:55 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16713 | logging: Redefine CSV and segwit deployments to avoid unknown softforks warning by jnewbery · Pull Request #16713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2702019-09-05T17:59:05 <jnewbery> thanks
2712019-09-05T17:59:47 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
2722019-09-05T17:59:58 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732019-09-05T18:00:01 *** Velociraptor1 has quit IRC
2742019-09-05T18:00:08 <instagibbs> any trick to these travis timeouts im seeing
2752019-09-05T18:00:10 <instagibbs> 10 minutes no output
2762019-09-05T18:00:36 <sipa> yeah i'm seeing it too
2772019-09-05T18:02:57 <instagibbs> I used to get these with some secp-zkp stress tests on 32 bit arch, first time seeing them anywhere else really :(
2782019-09-05T18:04:20 <BlueMatt> last-ditch attempt at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16421 for 0.19....already has 2.5 acks....
2792019-09-05T18:11:18 *** foobar17 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802019-09-05T18:12:26 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812019-09-05T18:12:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #16704: Don't warn about activated buried BIP 9 deployments (master...buried-versionbits-cache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16704
2822019-09-05T18:12:27 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2832019-09-05T18:17:44 *** total1ty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842019-09-05T18:22:32 <sipa> i don't understand this appveyor error:
2852019-09-05T18:22:32 <sipa> c:\projects\bitcoin\src\script\miniscript.cpp(274): error C2220: warning treated as error - no 'object' file generated [C:\projects\bitcoin\build_msvc\libbitcoin_common\libbitcoin_common.vcxproj]
2862019-09-05T18:22:34 <sipa> 6>c:\projects\bitcoin\src\script\miniscript.cpp(274): warning C4101: 'error': unreferenced local variable [C:\projects\bitcoin\build_msvc\libbitcoin_common\libbitcoin_common.vcxproj]
2872019-09-05T18:23:00 <sipa> it'd be nice to know what variable is unreferenced
2882019-09-05T18:24:56 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892019-09-05T18:24:57 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] GChuf opened pull request #16808: GUI: fix and stylize language list (master...translation-list-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16808
2902019-09-05T18:24:58 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2912019-09-05T18:26:32 <MarcoFalke> the travis timeouts when running apt update in docker are known for months
2922019-09-05T18:26:45 <MarcoFalke> I have a ticket open with them, but no real reply or solution
2932019-09-05T18:26:48 <sipa> seems i haven't been submitting many PRs lately :)
2942019-09-05T18:27:25 <MarcoFalke> Sometimes the warnings don't come for a week or two, but at some point they are back ..
2952019-09-05T18:28:30 <MarcoFalke> sipa: The variable is literally 'error': https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16800/files#diff-2ce6275a6ed9764e6d2917e4bca2d587R274
2962019-09-05T18:29:06 <MarcoFalke> I think you can fix it by removing ' error' from that line
2972019-09-05T18:29:39 <sipa> huh
2982019-09-05T18:29:49 <sipa> oops, i was looking in the wrong branch :(
2992019-09-05T18:29:59 <sipa> thanks
3002019-09-05T18:30:03 *** xzytrewq has quit IRC
3012019-09-05T18:33:22 *** xzytrewq has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022019-09-05T18:36:43 *** owowo has quit IRC
3032019-09-05T18:36:44 <jb55> I might have missed the convo but has anyone looked at github actions for builds?
3042019-09-05T18:37:54 <sipa> yes
3052019-09-05T18:39:55 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062019-09-05T18:39:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #16809: depends: zlib: Move toolchain options to configure (master...2019-09-improve-zlib-pkg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16809
3072019-09-05T18:39:58 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3082019-09-05T18:40:41 <dongcarl> jb55: I believe MarcoFalke talked about it a little on #bitcoin-builds, don't remember exactly but you could search the logs
3092019-09-05T18:42:32 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102019-09-05T18:42:32 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112019-09-05T18:48:11 *** xzytrewq has quit IRC
3122019-09-05T18:51:32 *** ddustin has quit IRC
3132019-09-05T18:52:16 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3142019-09-05T18:53:54 <MarcoFalke> github actions is in beta and does not accomodate our use-case (for now)
3152019-09-05T18:54:47 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162019-09-05T18:54:47 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #16810: guix: Remove ssp spec file hack (master...2019-09-guix-remove-ssp-spec) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16810
3172019-09-05T18:54:48 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3182019-09-05T18:56:55 *** ddustin has quit IRC
3192019-09-05T19:00:35 *** mdunnio has quit IRC
3202019-09-05T19:01:11 <achow101> meeting?
3212019-09-05T19:01:14 <wumpus> #startmeeting
3222019-09-05T19:01:14 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Sep 5 19:01:14 2019 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
3232019-09-05T19:01:14 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
3242019-09-05T19:01:15 <sipa> meeting?
3252019-09-05T19:01:18 <jonasschnelli> hi
3262019-09-05T19:01:21 <sipa> hi
3272019-09-05T19:01:29 <achow101> hi
3282019-09-05T19:01:31 <aj> hola
3292019-09-05T19:01:32 <MarcoFalke> hoy
3302019-09-05T19:01:48 <meshcollider> hi
3312019-09-05T19:02:03 <moneyball> hi
3322019-09-05T19:02:06 *** Kvaciral has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332019-09-05T19:02:08 *** iamtimmarchant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342019-09-05T19:02:11 <instagibbs> hi
3352019-09-05T19:02:16 <wumpus> there are three proposed topics in https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a
3362019-09-05T19:02:32 <wumpus> - proposed by jnewbery: review/merge #16704 or #16713 to remove worrying "unknown new rules activated (versionbit 1)" warning
3372019-09-05T19:02:34 <wumpus> - proposed by fjahr: Rolling UTXO set hash
3382019-09-05T19:02:34 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16704 | Dont warn about activated buried BIP 9 deployments by achow101 · Pull Request #16704 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3392019-09-05T19:02:36 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16713 | Ignore old versionbit activations to avoid unknown softforks warning by jnewbery · Pull Request #16713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3402019-09-05T19:02:36 <wumpus> - proposed by achow101: avoid loading every wallet transaction into memory
3412019-09-05T19:02:43 <jeremyrubin> hi
3422019-09-05T19:02:48 <fjahr> hi
3432019-09-05T19:02:51 <jonatack> hi
3442019-09-05T19:03:03 <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb moneyball kvaciral
3452019-09-05T19:03:42 <wumpus> but let's start with the usual
3462019-09-05T19:03:47 <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
3472019-09-05T19:04:04 <wumpus> 7 blockers, 7 things chasing concept ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
3482019-09-05T19:04:09 <gleb> hi
3492019-09-05T19:04:18 <BlueMatt> I think its already there, but https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16421 is close to landing and I still really want it for 19
3502019-09-05T19:04:20 <wumpus> note that the feature freeze for 0.19 is in 10 days
3512019-09-05T19:04:23 <BlueMatt> (and its a small diff!)
3522019-09-05T19:04:32 <wumpus> so we likely want to prioritize features that are close to ready now
3532019-09-05T19:04:54 <wumpus> right
3542019-09-05T19:05:08 <wumpus> would be nice if that makes it in
3552019-09-05T19:05:32 <gleb> #16702 is done code-wise (I think), but perhaps it's suboptimal to add it to high prio at this point when we're close to the feature freeze.
3562019-09-05T19:05:35 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16702 | p2p: supplying and using asmap to improve IP bucketing in addrman by naumenkogs · Pull Request #16702 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3572019-09-05T19:05:47 <wumpus> also #15759
3582019-09-05T19:05:51 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15759 | p2p: Add 2 outbound block-relay-only connections by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15759 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3592019-09-05T19:06:22 <wumpus> gleb: yes, we might want to keep that for 0.20
3602019-09-05T19:07:31 <wumpus> also requires too much review to still make it to 0.19 anyway
3612019-09-05T19:07:38 <wumpus> still, great to hear you're making progress!
3622019-09-05T19:08:18 <sipa> yeah, that sounds like too close to make it
3632019-09-05T19:08:35 <jeremyrubin> Not super critical, and it's relatively new so not much time for review, but would help me to get #16766 as my work on OP_SECURETHEBAG wallet support depends on it
3642019-09-05T19:08:37 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16766 | wallet: Make IsTrusted scan parents recursively by JeremyRubin · Pull Request #16766 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3652019-09-05T19:08:38 <sipa> i'll review 15759 again
3662019-09-05T19:08:46 <BlueMatt> 16702 is probably a bit far review-wise, though it would be nice, but 15759 is also really close and should god
3672019-09-05T19:08:47 <jeremyrubin> And I think it is a bug
3682019-09-05T19:09:57 <sipa> bug fixes can go after the feature freeze
3692019-09-05T19:10:11 <wumpus> yes
3702019-09-05T19:10:32 <jeremyrubin> wasn't sure as it's a substantial behavior change for wallet, but fine :)
3712019-09-05T19:10:45 <wumpus> they can go any time ("scan parents recursively" sounds scary to me though, performance wise :)
3722019-09-05T19:11:04 <sipa> it's cached to avoid exponential blowup
3732019-09-05T19:11:10 <sipa> but otherwise, yeah
3742019-09-05T19:11:15 <instagibbs> also depends on how new the bug is. I *think* it's ancient behavior that "normally" never hits
3752019-09-05T19:11:16 <wumpus> phew
3762019-09-05T19:11:17 <instagibbs> anyways
3772019-09-05T19:11:46 <sipa> instagibbs: agree
3782019-09-05T19:12:16 <jeremyrubin> instagibbs: I think that is correct
3792019-09-05T19:12:29 <instagibbs> with fancier wallet setups we may actually hit it :)
3802019-09-05T19:12:46 <wumpus> anyhow I've added it to high priority for review as requested, people can choose for themselves what to review
3812019-09-05T19:13:26 <wumpus> #topic remove worrying "unknown new rules activated (versionbit 1)" warning (jnewbery)
3822019-09-05T19:13:30 <wumpus> yes please
3832019-09-05T19:13:54 <wumpus> so I guess the disussion is: #16704 or #16713
3842019-09-05T19:13:55 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16704 | Dont warn about activated buried BIP 9 deployments by achow101 · Pull Request #16704 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3852019-09-05T19:13:56 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16713 | Ignore old versionbit activations to avoid unknown softforks warning by jnewbery · Pull Request #16713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3862019-09-05T19:14:24 <achow101> 16713 is the simpler, easier to review fix
3872019-09-05T19:14:52 <achow101> But I think it would be better to eventually get rid of these deployment parameters and have a more permanent solution that lets us reuse bits in the future
3882019-09-05T19:15:19 <wumpus> what disadvantages does it have compared to the other one?
3892019-09-05T19:15:25 <MarcoFalke> bits can be reused as long as they don't overlap in time
3902019-09-05T19:15:27 <aj> 16713 is updated as of a few hours to be even simpler; i think it lets us reuse bits fine?
3912019-09-05T19:15:42 <wumpus> e.g. why are there two open at all?
3922019-09-05T19:16:00 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: yup
3932019-09-05T19:16:10 <MarcoFalke> I already closed the one by achow101 *hides*
3942019-09-05T19:16:26 <aj> MarcoFalke: smooth
3952019-09-05T19:17:24 <wumpus> ok, that concludes the discussion then I guess :)
3962019-09-05T19:17:26 <achow101> my understanding of how consensus.vDeployments worked was that you couldn't define two forks with the same bit since they'd have to occupy the same index position and that's not possible
3972019-09-05T19:17:40 <wumpus> oh
3982019-09-05T19:17:42 <achow101> but 16713 has changed since I last reviewed it and it looks very different
3992019-09-05T19:17:43 <wumpus> sorry
4002019-09-05T19:18:06 <MarcoFalke> oh, maybe you are right when it comes to the implementation. Though, BIP9 does allow it
4012019-09-05T19:18:21 <wumpus> BIP9 definitely allows it, that was an important part of the design
4022019-09-05T19:18:25 <aj> achow101: vDeployments just matches the enum, the actual bits used are independant, and just have to not overlap per their corresponding timestamps
4032019-09-05T19:18:51 <sipa> i haven't looked at the code in a while, but it was certainly intended to permit reuse of bits
4042019-09-05T19:19:26 <sipa> the deployments array index is independent from the bip9 bit position
4052019-09-05T19:19:38 <instagibbs> yep
4062019-09-05T19:19:57 <aj> achow101: see VersionBitsConditionChecker::Mask in versionbits.cpp, it pulls out the .bit field from BIP9Deployment struct
4072019-09-05T19:20:16 *** foobar17 has quit IRC
4082019-09-05T19:21:08 <achow101> i'm probably wrong
4092019-09-05T19:21:24 <instagibbs> It was confusing the first time I read it, I came to same wrong conclusion
4102019-09-05T19:22:10 <aj> achow101: there's also a unit test for overlapping bit usage on mainnet in src/test/versionbits_tests.cpp, "Verify that the deployment windows of [...]"
4112019-09-05T19:22:21 *** reallll has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4122019-09-05T19:22:26 <wumpus> if even experienced developers get confused by it, some documentation/comments might help in that case
4132019-09-05T19:24:04 <wumpus> #action please review #16713 so that it can be merged asap
4142019-09-05T19:24:04 <MarcoFalke> I think it shouldn't matter in practice, hopefully there are less than 27 softforks in the future
4152019-09-05T19:24:06 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16713 | Ignore old versionbit activations to avoid unknown softforks warning by jnewbery · Pull Request #16713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4162019-09-05T19:24:27 <wumpus> given that 'the future' is unbounded, that's a difficult statement
4172019-09-05T19:25:07 <wumpus> #topic Rolling UTXO set hash (fjahr)
4182019-09-05T19:25:40 <fjahr> Did anyone have time to look at the proposal? Any questions?
4192019-09-05T19:25:52 *** belcher has quit IRC
4202019-09-05T19:25:54 <achow101> link?
4212019-09-05T19:26:01 <instagibbs> fjahr, pitch it to us in a few sentences :)
4222019-09-05T19:26:23 <fjahr> https://gist.github.com/fjahr/fa4892874b090d3a4f4fccc5bafa0210
4232019-09-05T19:26:24 <sipa> fjahr: it's not clear to me exactly what you're proposal :)
4242019-09-05T19:26:32 <fjahr> I have picked up Pieter Wuille's proposal from 2017 to use a rolling hash for the UTXO set hash. It deals with the problem of a long computation time of the UTXO set hash which results in a slow RPC call gettxoutsetinfo (can take several minutes depending on hardware). I investigated three hash functions: MuHash, ECMH and LtHash and started implementing them in Bitcoin Core for comparison. However only MuHash
4252019-09-05T19:26:32 <fjahr> has a rolling hash implementation so far and my LtHash code is not as optimized as MuHash and ECMH. I am looking for feedback on concept, which choice to make for the hash function and implementation details before filing a PR to Bitcoin Core.
4262019-09-05T19:27:04 <sipa> it's a complicated question, as the right design may depend on how we intend to use the construction
4272019-09-05T19:27:07 *** spinza_ has quit IRC
4282019-09-05T19:27:12 <wumpus> fjahr: thanks for picking it up!
4292019-09-05T19:27:33 <MarcoFalke> I think one use case is assumeutxo
4302019-09-05T19:28:01 <fjahr> sipa: by construction you mean the hash, right?
4312019-09-05T19:28:02 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4322019-09-05T19:28:08 <sipa> fjahr: right
4332019-09-05T19:28:24 <sipa> assumeutxo (at least with a from-network-sync approach) will probably need more than just a single hash, as you want to be able to verify chunks etc
4342019-09-05T19:28:58 <sipa> fjahr: if i recall correctly, the biggest question i had was how to prioritize computation time vs use-from-cache time
4352019-09-05T19:29:44 <sipa> ECMH is slower to compute, but very fast to use from cached values (e.g. if you have precomputed the "diff" ECMH hash a transaction has, applying to a global sum is super fast)
4362019-09-05T19:29:51 <sipa> but MuHash is faster is overall computation time
4372019-09-05T19:29:51 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4382019-09-05T19:31:21 <fjahr> From my benchmarks ECMH was faster overall but I am not sure why MuHash did not perform as you expect in you Mail
4392019-09-05T19:31:25 *** shesek has quit IRC
4402019-09-05T19:32:07 <sipa> where do you see a discrepancy? in the hash-to-group-element operation, or in the multity?
4412019-09-05T19:32:11 <sipa> *multiply?
4422019-09-05T19:32:24 <sipa> actually i think the discussion of what hash to pick is less important for this meeting
4432019-09-05T19:32:34 <sipa> we should probably focus on ways to integrate
4442019-09-05T19:33:16 <fjahr> ok, and also if there is enough interest for this
4452019-09-05T19:33:25 <aj> it's super cool
4462019-09-05T19:33:48 <jeremyrubin> Are both constructions one-way?
4472019-09-05T19:33:55 <jeremyrubin> How does that interplay with reorgs
4482019-09-05T19:33:58 <fjahr> In terms of integration I chose to implement this as an index, any feedback on this?
4492019-09-05T19:34:11 <jeremyrubin> Maybe I should read more out of band of here...
4502019-09-05T19:34:12 <sipa> fjahr: that really depends what for
4512019-09-05T19:34:56 <fjahr> jeremyrubin: hashes can also be removed again so no problem with reorgs
4522019-09-05T19:35:00 <sipa> i think as an index it's hard to use precomputation
4532019-09-05T19:35:15 <sipa> which you really want if you want the rolling part
4542019-09-05T19:37:25 *** iamtimmarchant has quit IRC
4552019-09-05T19:37:27 <fjahr> sipa: what would you suggest in terms of integration?
4562019-09-05T19:38:02 *** iamtimmarchant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572019-09-05T19:38:04 <sipa> that really depends on what we want to use it for
4582019-09-05T19:39:17 <aj> sipa: could have it rolling, but in it's own slightly delayed thread like tx indexes, without worrying about precomputation, at least if you don't want to enforce it in consensus
4592019-09-05T19:39:39 <wumpus> there's 20 minutes to go and still a topic left, let's move on?
4602019-09-05T19:39:52 <sipa> fjahr: let's talk more after the meeting
4612019-09-05T19:40:00 <fjahr> sipa: sure
4622019-09-05T19:40:13 <wumpus> #topic avoid loading every wallet transaction into memory (achow101)
4632019-09-05T19:40:18 <wumpus> thanks
4642019-09-05T19:40:18 <sipa> btw, the secp ECMH code you have looks great
4652019-09-05T19:40:37 <achow101> This is a wallet topic, and probably better for the wallet meeting, but that's next week..
4662019-09-05T19:40:50 <wumpus> is there any hurry? :-)
4672019-09-05T19:41:00 <achow101> I was thinking about ways to reduce the memory footprint of loaded wallet files
4682019-09-05T19:41:17 <wumpus> concept ACK anyhow
4692019-09-05T19:41:24 <jonasschnelli> jup. also ack
4702019-09-05T19:41:36 <sipa> achow101: seems hard
4712019-09-05T19:41:42 <achow101> I was wondering if anyone who was more familiar with the wallet tracking part of the wallet knew if this was attempted before or would majorly break something?
4722019-09-05T19:42:00 <wumpus> it always seemed unnecessary to me to keep all transactions, even historical ones with all outputs spent, in memory
4732019-09-05T19:42:15 <jonasschnelli> There is a PR where all wallettxns where kept in mem
4742019-09-05T19:42:31 <jonasschnelli> +different DB formst
4752019-09-05T19:42:34 <wumpus> but yes, it's such a part of the current wallet design, it's definitely not going to be easy
4762019-09-05T19:42:49 <jonasschnelli> #5686 (very old)
4772019-09-05T19:42:51 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/5686 | [Wallet] replace BDB with internal append only (logdb) backend by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #5686 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4782019-09-05T19:42:53 <sipa> achow101: you mean not _show_ them anymore
4792019-09-05T19:42:59 <sipa> or just not load them in memory?
4802019-09-05T19:43:15 <achow101> not load them into memory, so it would read from disk when the full tx is needed
4812019-09-05T19:43:21 <wumpus> right
4822019-09-05T19:43:26 <achow101> I plan on just keeping UTXOs and txids in memory
4832019-09-05T19:43:39 *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4842019-09-05T19:43:40 <sipa> achow101: i wish you good luck :)
4852019-09-05T19:43:44 <jonasschnelli> heh
4862019-09-05T19:43:46 <wumpus> outward behavior probably shouldn't change
4872019-09-05T19:44:05 <jonasschnelli> Why not just loading everything into memory?
4882019-09-05T19:44:15 <jonasschnelli> I think 1000+ wallets are OOS
4892019-09-05T19:44:26 * jeremyrubin wonders how big the largest wallet is
4902019-09-05T19:44:37 *** reallll is now known as belcher
4912019-09-05T19:44:37 <sipa> OOS?
4922019-09-05T19:44:41 <jonasschnelli> out of scope
4932019-09-05T19:44:42 <jeremyrubin> out of scope
4942019-09-05T19:44:48 <wumpus> there are some heavy users of bitcoin core which have to re-cycle their wallet once in a while because it becomes to big
4952019-09-05T19:45:00 <sipa> i don't think memory usage is the problem there
4962019-09-05T19:45:10 <achow101> big wallets also take a while to load, although I don't expect this to effect that
4972019-09-05T19:45:12 <sipa> just the size of the maps that's being traversed for a multitude of operations
4982019-09-05T19:45:18 <wumpus> loading time is likely the problem, yes
4992019-09-05T19:45:31 <wumpus> then again that's directly related
5002019-09-05T19:45:37 <achow101> ideally this will also reduce the time it takes to calculate things like balances since not every single transaction will be iterated over
5012019-09-05T19:45:54 <wumpus> yes, exactly
5022019-09-05T19:45:56 <sipa> achow101: i'm very very scared of things like that
5032019-09-05T19:45:59 <jarthur> Are exchanges and other large-scale wallet-holders recommended to use Core purely for networking, and maintain their own non-Core wallets?
5042019-09-05T19:46:01 <sipa> it needs a completely new design i'm afraid
5052019-09-05T19:46:16 <achow101> sipa: how so?
5062019-09-05T19:46:27 <sipa> everything is transaction oriented in the current wallet
5072019-09-05T19:46:34 <wumpus> jarthur: some use core, but can't mention any names
5082019-09-05T19:46:40 <sipa> new transactions that can others to become conflicted etc
5092019-09-05T19:46:43 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5102019-09-05T19:47:04 <sipa> changing that to a UTXO model and keeping it in sync with the list of transactions... sounds very hard
5112019-09-05T19:47:19 <achow101> right, but I think those can still be done by just a list of txids, spent prevouts, and utxos
5122019-09-05T19:47:24 <jeremyrubin> is it a more important goal to reduce the number of txns or the amount of data each one is storing?
5132019-09-05T19:47:45 <sipa> but you still need all the dependency tracking between transactions to compute the utxos
5142019-09-05T19:48:04 <sipa> you can cache the utxo list; that would probably be a worthwhile performance improvement
5152019-09-05T19:48:18 <wumpus> that would likely be a better first step
5162019-09-05T19:48:24 *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorssueca
5172019-09-05T19:48:28 <sipa> but getting rid of the transaction entirely... i don't see how
5182019-09-05T19:48:36 <achow101> also, maybe just loading a neutered transaction without input scripts, because we don't need those
5192019-09-05T19:48:49 <sipa> achow101: yeah that can work
5202019-09-05T19:48:53 <jeremyrubin> achow101: that's what I was getting at :)
5212019-09-05T19:49:18 <sipa> achow101: also, don't let me discourage you if you see a good way to implement it :)
5222019-09-05T19:49:32 <sipa> i'm happy to be convinced otherwise
5232019-09-05T19:49:35 <wumpus> there's definitely some cut-off possible, I mean, transactions from years ago can't really become conflicted anymore
5242019-09-05T19:49:35 <jeremyrubin> achow101: a good first step might be to cache the scriptPubKey of inputs in a WtX
5252019-09-05T19:50:36 <sipa> i suspect thay in native descriptor wallets the IsMine check will be a lot faster than it currently is
5262019-09-05T19:50:38 <achow101> anyways, that's all. just wanted to get some opinions before diving in
5272019-09-05T19:50:43 <wumpus> at some point spent transactions deep enough in the chain can be permantly archived
5282019-09-05T19:51:24 <wumpus> might be non-trivial to come up with criteria but I don't think every transaction needs to be potentially active forever
5292019-09-05T19:51:37 <wumpus> achow101: good luck !
5302019-09-05T19:53:03 <wumpus> #endmeeting
5312019-09-05T19:53:03 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Sep 5 19:53:03 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
5322019-09-05T19:53:03 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-09-05-19.01.html
5332019-09-05T19:53:03 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-09-05-19.01.txt
5342019-09-05T19:53:03 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-09-05-19.01.log.html
5352019-09-05T19:53:14 <jarthur> MarcoFalke: glad to see the flake8 update finally made it in and you won't have to keep rebasing it. :)
5362019-09-05T19:53:19 *** iamtimmarchant has quit IRC
5372019-09-05T19:53:43 <jeremyrubin> achow101: you can save *some* memory by repacking the CWalletTx struct I bet :)
5382019-09-05T19:54:31 <wumpus> if you repack it you might as well re-retrieve it from the database
5392019-09-05T19:55:08 <achow101> I want to avoid touching the wallet database, although that may not be possible
5402019-09-05T19:55:31 <jeremyrubin> I meant just the fact that there's a lot of fields in the struct that are char then uint64 or something
5412019-09-05T19:55:41 <jeremyrubin> which adds a lot of interior padding
5422019-09-05T19:56:00 <wumpus> suure
5432019-09-05T19:56:12 <jeremyrubin> I did say *some*
5442019-09-05T19:56:16 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5452019-09-05T19:56:17 <achow101> just a bit
5462019-09-05T19:56:43 <achow101> At this rate, I think I'll have rewritten the entire wallet by this time next year
5472019-09-05T19:57:00 <sipa> if done incrementally, i think that'd be great :)
5482019-09-05T19:57:16 <wumpus> if you manage to do that you're the first ever person to achieve it, people have been saying that since 2011 or so though
5492019-09-05T19:57:37 <sipa> haha
5502019-09-05T19:57:45 <sipa> in 2011 the wallet was still part of main.cpp :p
5512019-09-05T19:57:47 <wumpus> but I'm happy to see the work picking up lately on the wallet
5522019-09-05T19:57:49 <sipa> we've come a long way
5532019-09-05T19:59:04 <wumpus> yes, we've come a long way, for a long time there was hardly any interest in it and some devs were even arguing about removing it because it was just too bad
5542019-09-05T19:59:29 <wumpus> it's definitely not like that anymore
5552019-09-05T20:09:55 *** xzytrewq has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5562019-09-05T20:13:48 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5572019-09-05T20:13:48 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] martinus closed pull request #16801: faster & less memory for sync: bulk pool allocator for node based containers (master...2019-08-bulkpoolallocator) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16801
5582019-09-05T20:13:49 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5592019-09-05T20:14:20 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5602019-09-05T20:14:20 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] martinus reopened pull request #16801: faster & less memory for sync: bulk pool allocator for node based containers (master...2019-08-bulkpoolallocator) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16801
5612019-09-05T20:14:21 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5622019-09-05T20:27:32 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5632019-09-05T20:30:27 *** Deadhand has quit IRC
5642019-09-05T20:32:17 *** Deadhand has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5652019-09-05T20:54:50 *** so has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5662019-09-05T20:56:11 *** kristapsk_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5672019-09-05T20:56:27 *** kristapsk has quit IRC
5682019-09-05T21:00:02 *** total1ty has quit IRC
5692019-09-05T21:03:45 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5702019-09-05T21:08:24 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5712019-09-05T21:09:29 *** Kvaciral has quit IRC
5722019-09-05T21:17:35 *** carldani1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5732019-09-05T21:19:35 <instagibbs> for all the hate on the wallet, the only other solutions are things like Electrum personal server, and other more ad hoc solutions. It's a project worth iterating on :)
5742019-09-05T21:20:45 <instagibbs> > jeremyrubin wonders how big the largest wallet is
5752019-09-05T21:20:55 <instagibbs> I've seen a multi GB testnet wallet, but that likely doesn't count
5762019-09-05T21:21:38 <instagibbs> if you end up using Core wallet for "industrial" wallet it indeed slows significantly. rhavar probably has some anecdotes
5772019-09-05T21:24:30 <sipa> change IsMine() to return true; and watch your wallet.dat explode :p
5782019-09-05T21:26:16 <instagibbs> I guess the slowdown is just iterating through all txns anyways, so meh :)
5792019-09-05T21:28:54 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
5802019-09-05T21:32:33 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5812019-09-05T21:45:22 <phantomcircuit> instagibbs, it does count, don't down play my entirely valid usecase
5822019-09-05T21:45:26 * phantomcircuit runs away
5832019-09-05T21:53:47 *** Zenton has quit IRC
5842019-09-05T22:01:54 *** Blockx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5852019-09-05T22:06:04 *** doesnt-code has quit IRC
5862019-09-05T22:13:54 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5872019-09-05T22:14:11 *** Blockx has quit IRC
5882019-09-05T22:30:40 *** doesnt-code has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5892019-09-05T22:30:54 *** jarthur has quit IRC
5902019-09-05T22:37:56 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5912019-09-05T22:41:28 *** doesnt-code has quit IRC
5922019-09-05T22:42:56 *** kristapsk_ is now known as kristapsk
5932019-09-05T22:48:10 *** ddustin has quit IRC
5942019-09-05T23:08:26 <warren> instagibbs: I've seen a very large Bitcoin exchange in Asia that had suffered for years with a single wallet.dat for all customer wallets. It got to the point where ordinary RPC queries against that wallet would take several minutes. As a workaround for faster queries I told them to setup many parallel servers with bitcoind -txindex and watch-only wallets so that they could parallelize their lookups. I also warned that they check for block
5952019-09-05T23:08:26 <warren> height agreement before querying anything.
5962019-09-05T23:13:47 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5972019-09-05T23:27:08 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5982019-09-05T23:29:28 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5992019-09-05T23:33:33 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
6002019-09-05T23:47:56 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6012019-09-05T23:47:56 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ch4ot1c opened pull request #16812: doc: Fix whitespace errs in .md files, bitcoin.conf, and Info.plist.in (master...docs/lint-markdown) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16812
6022019-09-05T23:47:58 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6032019-09-05T23:56:01 <jb55> might be handy to have a very large test wallet for performance testing
6042019-09-05T23:56:17 *** xzytrewq has quit IRC