1 2020-02-06T00:00:03  *** ggainey1 has quit IRC
  2 2020-02-06T00:04:35  *** spinza has quit IRC
  3 2020-02-06T00:10:33  *** manantial has quit IRC
  4 2020-02-06T00:14:21  *** ccdle12_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2020-02-06T00:15:11  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2020-02-06T00:16:05  *** schmidty_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2020-02-06T00:16:23  *** nijynot has quit IRC
  8 2020-02-06T00:17:07  *** paracyst has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2020-02-06T00:18:06  *** cfields_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2020-02-06T00:19:22  *** exhoplex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2020-02-06T00:19:38  *** wxss_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2020-02-06T00:19:59  *** PaulTroon has quit IRC
 13 2020-02-06T00:20:13  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 14 2020-02-06T00:21:22  *** ccdle12_ has quit IRC
 15 2020-02-06T00:21:28  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 16 2020-02-06T00:21:28  *** schmidty has quit IRC
 17 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** nirved has quit IRC
 18 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** paracyst_ has quit IRC
 19 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 20 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** cfields has quit IRC
 21 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** spaced0ut has quit IRC
 22 2020-02-06T00:21:29  *** BlueMatt has quit IRC
 23 2020-02-06T00:21:30  *** exho has quit IRC
 24 2020-02-06T00:21:30  *** ccook has quit IRC
 25 2020-02-06T00:21:30  *** wxss has quit IRC
 26 2020-02-06T00:21:30  *** schmidty_ is now known as schmidty
 27 2020-02-06T00:22:27  *** ccook has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2020-02-06T00:22:31  *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2020-02-06T00:23:17  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2020-02-06T00:23:31  *** nirved has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2020-02-06T00:24:30  *** arik__ has quit IRC
 32 2020-02-06T00:24:31  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 33 2020-02-06T00:24:47  *** arik__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2020-02-06T00:25:01  *** pkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2020-02-06T00:25:01  *** wallet42 has quit IRC
 36 2020-02-06T00:25:16  *** eragmus has quit IRC
 37 2020-02-06T00:25:17  *** petezz4 has quit IRC
 38 2020-02-06T00:25:18  *** fjahr has quit IRC
 39 2020-02-06T00:25:19  *** Lexyon___ has quit IRC
 40 2020-02-06T00:25:19  *** amiti has quit IRC
 41 2020-02-06T00:25:21  *** francisco_ has quit IRC
 42 2020-02-06T00:25:21  *** neatnik has quit IRC
 43 2020-02-06T00:25:23  *** Lightsword has quit IRC
 44 2020-02-06T00:25:25  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
 45 2020-02-06T00:25:25  *** nejon has quit IRC
 46 2020-02-06T00:25:27  *** fjahr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2020-02-06T00:25:32  *** petezz4 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2020-02-06T00:25:34  *** francisco_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2020-02-06T00:25:34  *** Lexyon___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2020-02-06T00:25:41  *** eragmus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2020-02-06T00:25:42  *** Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2020-02-06T00:25:46  *** neatnik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2020-02-06T00:25:47  *** amiti has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2020-02-06T00:25:48  *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 55 2020-02-06T00:25:50  *** emzy has quit IRC
 56 2020-02-06T00:26:14  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2020-02-06T00:26:18  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2020-02-06T00:27:08  *** nejon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2020-02-06T00:27:21  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2020-02-06T00:27:29  *** helo has quit IRC
 61 2020-02-06T00:27:37  *** helo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2020-02-06T00:27:48  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 63 2020-02-06T00:28:02  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2020-02-06T00:28:10  *** emzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2020-02-06T00:29:55  *** pkr has quit IRC
 66 2020-02-06T00:30:38  *** real_or_random has quit IRC
 67 2020-02-06T00:31:00  *** real_or_random has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2020-02-06T00:48:12  *** furkanmustafa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2020-02-06T01:02:16  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 70 2020-02-06T01:10:41  *** cornfeedhobo has quit IRC
 71 2020-02-06T01:12:35  *** promag has quit IRC
 72 2020-02-06T01:13:11  *** cornfeedhobo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2020-02-06T01:40:43  <luke-jr> fjahr: do we need #17843 in 0.19?
 74 2020-02-06T01:40:48  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17843 | wallet: Reset reused transactions cache by fjahr · Pull Request #17843 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 75 2020-02-06T02:06:21  *** hex17or has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2020-02-06T02:12:21  *** francisco_ has quit IRC
 77 2020-02-06T02:13:12  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2020-02-06T02:17:48  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
 79 2020-02-06T02:21:27  *** kristapsk has quit IRC
 80 2020-02-06T02:21:40  *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2020-02-06T02:26:34  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 82 2020-02-06T02:31:31  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
 83 2020-02-06T02:54:15  *** charlesz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2020-02-06T03:00:01  *** furkanmustafa has quit IRC
 85 2020-02-06T03:01:13  *** abrissbirne has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2020-02-06T03:04:41  *** abrissbi1ne has quit IRC
 87 2020-02-06T03:08:10  *** charlesz has quit IRC
 88 2020-02-06T03:17:49  *** ToBeFree has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2020-02-06T03:18:13  *** ToBeFree is now known as Guest21723
 90 2020-02-06T03:47:29  *** felixfoertsch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 91 2020-02-06T03:48:21  *** felixfoertsch23 has quit IRC
 92 2020-02-06T03:50:07  *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2020-02-06T03:57:59  *** pkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 94 2020-02-06T03:59:59  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2020-02-06T03:59:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #18081: test: set a name for CI Docker containers (master...name_ci_docker_containers) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18081
 96 2020-02-06T04:00:00  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2020-02-06T04:16:21  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2020-02-06T04:21:23  *** PaulTroon has quit IRC
 99 2020-02-06T04:31:21  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
100 2020-02-06T04:32:50  *** pkr has quit IRC
101 2020-02-06T04:41:33  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2020-02-06T04:41:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #18082: logging: enable thread_local usage on macOS (master...macos_thread_local) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18082
103 2020-02-06T04:41:44  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2020-02-06T04:44:43  *** turbo_choo has quit IRC
105 2020-02-06T04:56:55  *** turbo_choo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2020-02-06T04:57:57  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2020-02-06T05:00:03  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
108 2020-02-06T05:14:43  *** sipa has quit IRC
109 2020-02-06T05:16:21  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2020-02-06T05:23:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2020-02-06T05:23:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #18083: [0.19] wallet: Reset reused transactions cache (0.19...bugfix_reused_tx_cache-0.19.1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18083
112 2020-02-06T05:23:58  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2020-02-06T05:29:51  *** fox2p has quit IRC
114 2020-02-06T05:34:24  *** fox2p has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2020-02-06T05:42:46  *** ppisati has quit IRC
116 2020-02-06T05:49:23  *** ppisati has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2020-02-06T05:57:55  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2020-02-06T05:58:56  *** DaleBewan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2020-02-06T06:00:02  *** Guest21723 has quit IRC
120 2020-02-06T06:06:22  *** DaleBewan has quit IRC
121 2020-02-06T06:06:58  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
122 2020-02-06T06:09:05  *** r8921039_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2020-02-06T06:11:58  *** gkrizek has quit IRC
124 2020-02-06T06:13:42  *** r8921039_ has quit IRC
125 2020-02-06T06:15:47  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-02-06T06:17:52  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2020-02-06T06:18:37  *** Cotillion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2020-02-06T06:20:42  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
129 2020-02-06T06:21:51  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2020-02-06T06:22:35  *** PaulTroon has quit IRC
131 2020-02-06T06:23:37  *** sturles has quit IRC
132 2020-02-06T06:23:37  *** brikk has quit IRC
133 2020-02-06T06:23:44  *** brikk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2020-02-06T06:24:05  *** sturles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
135 2020-02-06T06:24:06  *** sturles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2020-02-06T06:26:32  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
137 2020-02-06T06:29:27  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
138 2020-02-06T06:30:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2020-02-06T06:30:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8a56f79d4912...4d211c8da112
140 2020-02-06T06:30:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master acd644b fanquake: build: remove --large-address-aware linker flag
141 2020-02-06T06:30:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4d211c8 fanquake: Merge #18003: build: remove --large-address-aware linker flag
142 2020-02-06T06:30:40  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2020-02-06T06:30:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2020-02-06T06:30:56  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #18003: build: remove --large-address-aware linker flag (master...configure_large_address_aware) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18003
145 2020-02-06T06:30:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-02-06T06:34:07  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
147 2020-02-06T06:39:28  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
148 2020-02-06T06:41:54  *** kristapsk has quit IRC
149 2020-02-06T06:42:55  *** r8921039_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2020-02-06T06:44:09  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2020-02-06T06:44:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4d211c8da112...23fab1a3dfe6
152 2020-02-06T06:44:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master acf8abc João Barbosa: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog
153 2020-02-06T06:44:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 23fab1a fanquake: Merge #18062: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog
154 2020-02-06T06:44:12  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
155 2020-02-06T06:44:13  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
156 2020-02-06T06:44:30  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2020-02-06T06:44:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #18062: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog (master...2020-02-fix-unitialized-progressDialog) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18062
158 2020-02-06T06:44:31  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2020-02-06T06:47:12  *** r8921039_ has quit IRC
160 2020-02-06T07:09:04  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2020-02-06T07:19:50  *** r8921039_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2020-02-06T07:20:18  *** manantial has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2020-02-06T07:24:33  *** r8921039_ has quit IRC
164 2020-02-06T07:28:32  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2020-02-06T07:29:26  *** r8921039_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
166 2020-02-06T07:32:58  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
167 2020-02-06T07:33:59  *** r8921039_ has quit IRC
168 2020-02-06T07:42:42  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2020-02-06T07:44:23  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
170 2020-02-06T07:44:54  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
171 2020-02-06T07:49:00  <goatpig> hello
172 2020-02-06T07:49:06  <goatpig> what's the current dust limit?
173 2020-02-06T07:49:37  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
174 2020-02-06T07:54:34  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2020-02-06T07:58:36  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
176 2020-02-06T08:00:48  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
177 2020-02-06T08:01:19  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2020-02-06T08:05:55  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
179 2020-02-06T08:05:58  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
180 2020-02-06T08:07:06  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
181 2020-02-06T08:10:00  *** promag has quit IRC
182 2020-02-06T08:12:07  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
183 2020-02-06T08:14:05  *** michagogo has quit IRC
184 2020-02-06T08:40:12  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2020-02-06T08:44:47  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
186 2020-02-06T08:47:24  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2020-02-06T08:52:09  *** promag has quit IRC
188 2020-02-06T09:00:02  *** Cotillion has quit IRC
189 2020-02-06T09:00:33  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2020-02-06T09:01:37  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2020-02-06T09:01:57  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192 2020-02-06T09:03:43  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
193 2020-02-06T09:03:45  *** ghost43_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
194 2020-02-06T09:05:27  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
195 2020-02-06T09:12:13  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2020-02-06T09:16:52  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
197 2020-02-06T09:18:08  *** shaunm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2020-02-06T09:18:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2020-02-06T09:18:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #18084: 0.19: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog (0.19...2020-02-backport-18062) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18084
200 2020-02-06T09:18:13  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2020-02-06T09:30:38  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2020-02-06T09:35:13  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
203 2020-02-06T09:38:23  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2020-02-06T10:25:26  *** andrewtoth_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2020-02-06T10:27:43  *** andrewtoth has quit IRC
206 2020-02-06T10:30:32  *** timothy has quit IRC
207 2020-02-06T10:31:34  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2020-02-06T10:34:20  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2020-02-06T10:34:47  *** belcher has quit IRC
210 2020-02-06T10:38:21  <jonasschnelli> goatpig: see DUST_RELAY_TX_FEE
211 2020-02-06T10:38:30  <jonasschnelli> and -dustrelayfee= config value
212 2020-02-06T10:38:57  <jonasschnelli> it's default is currently 3000sats in master AFAIK
213 2020-02-06T10:39:32  <jonasschnelli> 3000sats/kB to be more precise
214 2020-02-06T10:41:13  *** mryandao has quit IRC
215 2020-02-06T10:43:11  *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2020-02-06T10:46:06  *** mryandao has quit IRC
217 2020-02-06T10:48:03  *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2020-02-06T11:00:22  *** promag_ has quit IRC
219 2020-02-06T11:00:37  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2020-02-06T11:03:57  *** Cleora81Stehr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-02-06T11:16:43  *** Cleora81Stehr has quit IRC
222 2020-02-06T11:25:04  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
223 2020-02-06T11:31:34  <wumpus> promag: I'm not aware of any plans to bump the minimum qt version again, if you want to propose that feel free to open a PR, make sure you check for various linux distributions, I don't think 5.10+ is realistic as ubuntu bionic (18.04) still has 5.9 and no doubt others
224 2020-02-06T11:35:07  *** PaulTroon has quit IRC
225 2020-02-06T11:47:48  *** jonatack has quit IRC
226 2020-02-06T11:53:59  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2020-02-06T11:55:48  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2020-02-06T12:00:01  *** shaunm has quit IRC
229 2020-02-06T12:00:22  *** Liliaceae has quit IRC
230 2020-02-06T12:08:28  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2020-02-06T12:11:24  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2020-02-06T12:11:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #17807: net: Remove unnecessary portability typedef (master...akh_socket_arg_type) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17807
233 2020-02-06T12:11:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-02-06T12:13:33  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
235 2020-02-06T12:16:18  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2020-02-06T12:18:53  *** ghost43_ has quit IRC
237 2020-02-06T12:19:54  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2020-02-06T12:20:04  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2020-02-06T12:20:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj reopened pull request #16995: Fix gcc 9 warnings (master...2019_09_resolve_gcc_warnings) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16995
240 2020-02-06T12:20:05  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
241 2020-02-06T12:28:40  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
242 2020-02-06T12:28:54  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2020-02-06T12:30:14  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
244 2020-02-06T12:31:51  *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-02-06T12:32:26  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2020-02-06T12:32:32  *** r8921039 has quit IRC
247 2020-02-06T12:34:31  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
248 2020-02-06T12:37:13  *** jonatack has quit IRC
249 2020-02-06T12:37:14  *** afk11 has quit IRC
250 2020-02-06T12:37:40  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2020-02-06T12:44:34  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
252 2020-02-06T12:45:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
253 2020-02-06T12:45:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #18053: Silence "redundant move in return statement" warning on GCC9 (master...gcc9-silence-redundant-move) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18053
254 2020-02-06T12:45:21  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
255 2020-02-06T12:49:44  *** wimpunk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2020-02-06T12:49:50  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2020-02-06T13:12:54  *** promag has quit IRC
258 2020-02-06T13:13:18  *** promag_ has quit IRC
259 2020-02-06T13:13:40  *** amiti has quit IRC
260 2020-02-06T13:14:45  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2020-02-06T13:19:03  *** aerth has quit IRC
262 2020-02-06T13:19:09  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2020-02-06T13:19:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to 0.19: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/755b0734bb50...7d53995ff2b4
264 2020-02-06T13:19:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.19 b4e5363 João Barbosa: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog
265 2020-02-06T13:19:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.19 7d53995 fanquake: Merge #18084: 0.19: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog
266 2020-02-06T13:19:14  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
267 2020-02-06T13:19:25  *** promag_ has quit IRC
268 2020-02-06T13:19:29  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2020-02-06T13:19:29  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #18084: 0.19: gui: Fix unintialized WalletView::progressDialog (0.19...2020-02-backport-18062) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18084
270 2020-02-06T13:19:30  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2020-02-06T13:19:32  *** vfP56jSe has quit IRC
272 2020-02-06T13:19:32  *** arik__ has quit IRC
273 2020-02-06T13:20:07  *** Isthmus has quit IRC
274 2020-02-06T13:24:53  *** petezz4 has quit IRC
275 2020-02-06T14:01:00  *** aerth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-02-06T14:01:02  *** amiti has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2020-02-06T14:02:03  *** petezz4 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
278 2020-02-06T14:04:59  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2020-02-06T14:05:23  *** Isthmus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2020-02-06T14:06:56  <MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic (short topic) Remove i686 Linux download link from bitcoincore website
281 2020-02-06T14:07:26  *** arik__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282 2020-02-06T14:08:19  *** ar1el has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2020-02-06T14:08:23  *** afk11 has quit IRC
284 2020-02-06T14:09:05  *** vfP56jSe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2020-02-06T14:09:27  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
286 2020-02-06T14:10:06  *** timothy has quit IRC
287 2020-02-06T14:15:57  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2020-02-06T14:25:57  *** gkrizek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2020-02-06T14:27:18  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
290 2020-02-06T14:29:16  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2020-02-06T14:31:41  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2020-02-06T14:36:19  *** promag has quit IRC
293 2020-02-06T14:38:03  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
294 2020-02-06T14:40:06  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2020-02-06T14:41:30  <promag> wumpus: sure, too soon then, lets see next year
296 2020-02-06T14:45:14  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
297 2020-02-06T14:51:58  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
298 2020-02-06T14:58:43  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
299 2020-02-06T15:00:02  *** wimpunk has quit IRC
300 2020-02-06T15:00:39  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2020-02-06T15:01:44  *** timothy has quit IRC
302 2020-02-06T15:02:27  *** nijynot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2020-02-06T15:05:02  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2020-02-06T15:06:28  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2020-02-06T15:13:38  *** wumpus has quit IRC
306 2020-02-06T15:19:16  *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2020-02-06T15:23:23  *** nijynot has quit IRC
308 2020-02-06T15:26:22  *** spaced0ut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
309 2020-02-06T15:48:07  *** llamma1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
310 2020-02-06T15:50:43  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
311 2020-02-06T16:05:49  *** goatpig has quit IRC
312 2020-02-06T16:08:14  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2020-02-06T16:10:33  *** shesek has quit IRC
314 2020-02-06T16:11:01  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
315 2020-02-06T16:13:43  *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2020-02-06T16:16:06  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
317 2020-02-06T16:22:15  *** jonatack has quit IRC
318 2020-02-06T16:28:33  *** emzy has quit IRC
319 2020-02-06T16:28:33  *** emzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
320 2020-02-06T16:37:43  *** gkrizek has quit IRC
321 2020-02-06T16:57:43  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
322 2020-02-06T17:03:28  *** spaced0ut has quit IRC
323 2020-02-06T17:04:12  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2020-02-06T17:05:11  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
325 2020-02-06T17:07:05  *** SiAnDoG__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2020-02-06T17:13:24  *** promag has quit IRC
327 2020-02-06T17:21:13  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2020-02-06T17:22:02  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
329 2020-02-06T17:22:11  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
330 2020-02-06T17:23:38  *** tryphe_ has quit IRC
331 2020-02-06T17:26:43  *** promag has quit IRC
332 2020-02-06T17:32:32  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
333 2020-02-06T17:33:39  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
334 2020-02-06T17:34:11  *** shesek has quit IRC
335 2020-02-06T17:34:52  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
336 2020-02-06T17:36:02  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
337 2020-02-06T17:39:42  *** nitrow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
338 2020-02-06T17:44:36  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
339 2020-02-06T17:48:00  *** setpill has quit IRC
340 2020-02-06T17:49:32  *** promag has quit IRC
341 2020-02-06T17:52:07  <jonatack> Would someone kindly restart Travis for #17812
342 2020-02-06T17:52:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17812 | config, net, test: asmap functional tests and feature refinements by jonatack · Pull Request #17812 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
343 2020-02-06T17:52:52  *** timothy has quit IRC
344 2020-02-06T17:54:48  *** nitrow has quit IRC
345 2020-02-06T17:59:03  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
346 2020-02-06T18:00:02  *** llamma1 has quit IRC
347 2020-02-06T18:01:18  <luke-jr> jonatack: done
348 2020-02-06T18:06:35  <jonatack> luke-jr: thank you
349 2020-02-06T18:07:04  *** gkrizek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
350 2020-02-06T18:09:03  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2020-02-06T18:12:02  *** ar1el has quit IRC
352 2020-02-06T18:14:04  *** gkrizek has quit IRC
353 2020-02-06T18:14:31  *** gkrizek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2020-02-06T18:18:23  *** mota1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2020-02-06T18:26:01  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
356 2020-02-06T18:38:35  *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
357 2020-02-06T18:51:55  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
358 2020-02-06T19:00:00  <wumpus> #startmeeting
359 2020-02-06T19:00:00  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Feb  6 19:00:00 2020 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
360 2020-02-06T19:00:00  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
361 2020-02-06T19:00:16  <MarcoFalke> ahoy
362 2020-02-06T19:00:27  <wumpus> I don't expect many people to be here today with the London conference, but we can try...
363 2020-02-06T19:00:28  * BlueMatt 
364 2020-02-06T19:00:32  <sipsorcery> hi
365 2020-02-06T19:00:42  <sipa> hi
366 2020-02-06T19:00:46  <jonasschnelli> hi
367 2020-02-06T19:00:46  <emilengler> hi
368 2020-02-06T19:00:49  <amiti> hi
369 2020-02-06T19:01:01  <hebasto> hi
370 2020-02-06T19:01:09  * BlueMatt 
371 2020-02-06T19:01:15  <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 ariard digi_james amiti fjahr
372 2020-02-06T19:01:17  <wumpus> jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55
373 2020-02-06T19:01:45  <fjahr> hi
374 2020-02-06T19:01:51  <wumpus> one proposed topic on https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a: Remove i686 Linux download link from bitcoincore website (MarcoFalke)
375 2020-02-06T19:01:56  <aj> hi
376 2020-02-06T19:01:58  <wumpus> any last minute topic proposals?
377 2020-02-06T19:02:03  <jeremyrubin> hi
378 2020-02-06T19:02:23  <jeremyrubin> proposed topic: mempool project update
379 2020-02-06T19:02:30  <jonatack> hi
380 2020-02-06T19:02:39  <wumpus> jeremyrubin: ack
381 2020-02-06T19:02:41  <moneyball> hi
382 2020-02-06T19:02:42  <kanzure> hi
383 2020-02-06T19:02:53  <jkczyz> hi
384 2020-02-06T19:02:54  <kanzure> proposed topic: more topic selection (or actually, how about topics you don't want to hear about for march)
385 2020-02-06T19:02:56  <promag> hi
386 2020-02-06T19:03:02  <emilengler> proposed topic: the library for #17950, even if to use a library?
387 2020-02-06T19:03:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17950 | gui: Check the strength of an encryption password by emilengler · Pull Request #17950 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
388 2020-02-06T19:03:26  *** molz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
389 2020-02-06T19:03:35  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
390 2020-02-06T19:04:00  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 -> 6 blockers, 1 bugfix, 6 chasing concept ACK
391 2020-02-06T19:04:09  <wumpus> anything to add / remove or almost ready for merge?
392 2020-02-06T19:04:48  <meshcollider> hi
393 2020-02-06T19:04:59  <wumpus> hi
394 2020-02-06T19:05:18  <MarcoFalke> The cs_main cs_wallet thing needs rebase and has something proposed by ryanofsky as a preparation pull request. Should these be  exchanged?
395 2020-02-06T19:05:48  * luke-jr glances at some chirping crickets
396 2020-02-06T19:05:49  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: I suppose that makes sense, if the other one is a blocker for this one
397 2020-02-06T19:05:58  <wumpus> either that or add it too
398 2020-02-06T19:06:16  <MarcoFalke> #17954 is the prep I think
399 2020-02-06T19:06:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17954 | wallet: Remove calls to Chain::Lock methods by ryanofsky · Pull Request #17954 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
400 2020-02-06T19:06:34  <jonasschnelli> half of the PR in high-prio do fail CI
401 2020-02-06T19:06:51  <MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: travis s390x?
402 2020-02-06T19:07:04  <wumpus> ok, added
403 2020-02-06T19:07:10  <luke-jr> maybe we should disable the s390x temporarily?
404 2020-02-06T19:07:12  <ryanofsky> MarcoFalke, yes my preference would be to do 17954 first
405 2020-02-06T19:07:23  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: I don't know but makes people ignore CI (which is a QA issue in the long run
406 2020-02-06T19:07:45  <MarcoFalke> Yes, maybe we should disable it on travis for now
407 2020-02-06T19:07:51  <MarcoFalke> I do run it locally
408 2020-02-06T19:08:02  <hebasto> How valuable is s390x tests?
409 2020-02-06T19:08:03  * jonasschnelli think the CI should be less fragile
410 2020-02-06T19:08:12  <wumpus> hebasto: big-endian testing
411 2020-02-06T19:08:15  *** morcos has quit IRC
412 2020-02-06T19:08:33  <MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: travis is the only one that offers s390x native
413 2020-02-06T19:08:45  <wumpus> that's basically the only reason s390x testinig is valuable
414 2020-02-06T19:08:52  <luke-jr> too bad Travis doesn't have ppc64be
415 2020-02-06T19:08:54  <jonasschnelli> I think its very valuable
416 2020-02-06T19:08:55  <wumpus> no one runs bitcoind on that platfor mas far as I'm aware
417 2020-02-06T19:09:03  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
418 2020-02-06T19:09:07  <wumpus> so any other big-endian platform would do as well
419 2020-02-06T19:09:43  <sipa> yeah, even if we expect literally noone ever to use bitcoin core in production on s390x, variety in test platforms can often expose bugs present but undetectable on other platforms
420 2020-02-06T19:09:50  <MarcoFalke> I do run it, but it is through qemu
421 2020-02-06T19:10:05  <MarcoFalke> sipa: It did find a bug in the tests :)
422 2020-02-06T19:10:17  <sipa> MarcoFalke: the best kind of bug
423 2020-02-06T19:10:25  <MarcoFalke> +1
424 2020-02-06T19:10:31  <wumpus> especially for serialization changes it's very useful to test big endian correctness
425 2020-02-06T19:10:31  <jonasschnelli> Maybe its not ready for a per branch update/PR base but as a manual check?
426 2020-02-06T19:10:47  <jonatack> jonasschnelli: btw thank you for https://bitcoinbuilds.org. it is the first place i look for CI results.
427 2020-02-06T19:11:07  <jonasschnelli> jonatack: It's running again smoothly.. but no native s390x supper...
428 2020-02-06T19:11:24  <jonasschnelli> could try to get a qemu be env up. But I guess it will be too slow
429 2020-02-06T19:11:51  <sipa> may be useful to run s390x qemu on master on a regular basis, but not on every PR?
430 2020-02-06T19:12:04  <wumpus> power can can be big-endian as well, though, it's fairly rare (and travis doesn't offer that)
431 2020-02-06T19:12:05  <jonasschnelli> +1
432 2020-02-06T19:12:14  <MarcoFalke> If someone is knowledged in docker, #18016 is the problem we need fixed
433 2020-02-06T19:12:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18016 | travis: s390x ci build fails on travis because disk is too small · Issue #18016 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
434 2020-02-06T19:12:16  <wumpus> agree sipa
435 2020-02-06T19:12:36  <luke-jr> wumpus: not so rare; but can't be a simple chroot :/
436 2020-02-06T19:12:55  <MarcoFalke> So I think #action is to either fix #18016 or remove it and run locally?
437 2020-02-06T19:12:57  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18016 | travis: s390x ci build fails on travis because disk is too small · Issue #18016 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
438 2020-02-06T19:13:15  <wumpus> I don't think we can fix "disk too small" so that leaves removing it for now
439 2020-02-06T19:13:29  *** promag has quit IRC
440 2020-02-06T19:13:55  <MarcoFalke> It can be fixed with some docker settings and restarting docker, but I don't know anything about this "docker" thing
441 2020-02-06T19:14:14  <wumpus> me neither, I've always managed to avoid it
442 2020-02-06T19:14:47  <MarcoFalke> There is a disk large enough in /var/snap/lxd/... on travis
443 2020-02-06T19:14:57  <MarcoFalke> Anyway, next topic?
444 2020-02-06T19:15:07  <wumpus> #topic Remove i686 Linux download link from bitcoincore website (MarcoFalke)
445 2020-02-06T19:15:20  <wumpus> yes, let's do it
446 2020-02-06T19:15:24  <jonasschnelli> ack
447 2020-02-06T19:15:26  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
448 2020-02-06T19:15:31  <MarcoFalke> So based on a twitter poll, a mailing list post, we only found one confrimed user of i686 #17504
449 2020-02-06T19:15:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17504 | Should we still ship 32-bit x86 Linux binaries? · Issue #17504 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
450 2020-02-06T19:15:54  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/695
451 2020-02-06T19:15:54  <MarcoFalke> So as a first step it could make sense to remove the i686 download link from the website
452 2020-02-06T19:16:06  <emilengler> Shouldn't we wait until we don't produce any i686 anymore
453 2020-02-06T19:16:29  <MarcoFalke> emilengler: Removing the link first gives everyone another chance to notice it
454 2020-02-06T19:16:32  <luke-jr> ^
455 2020-02-06T19:16:32  <emilengler> I think it's a better approach to add a note on the website and remove the link once the new version got released
456 2020-02-06T19:16:42  <luke-jr> I'd like to be sure this doesn't turn into the Win32 situation
457 2020-02-06T19:16:49  <MarcoFalke> emilengler: The i686 bin will still be uploaded for now
458 2020-02-06T19:16:58  <luke-jr> the plan there afaik was simply to stop making binaries, but now we're removing the ability to even compile it
459 2020-02-06T19:17:14  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: That is not going to happen
460 2020-02-06T19:17:22  <wumpus> we need to support 32 bit for self-compiles, period
461 2020-02-06T19:17:24  <luke-jr> k
462 2020-02-06T19:17:31  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: We have a i686 centos build in ci, that is not going to be removed
463 2020-02-06T19:17:43  <wumpus> ARM 32 bit is not dead, and neither is RISC-V 32 bit, and some others
464 2020-02-06T19:18:32  <jonasschnelli> Indeed. There are a lot of Odroid in the field (Cortex A15).
465 2020-02-06T19:18:37  <wumpus> I think I've been very clear everywhere that this is about the shipped binaries
466 2020-02-06T19:18:49  <wumpus> for x86 32 bit
467 2020-02-06T19:18:53  <luke-jr> wumpus: right, but that was true for Win32 too
468 2020-02-06T19:19:23  <wumpus> win32 is really dead anyhow
469 2020-02-06T19:20:11  <emilengler> The topic was to remove it from the website and nothing else. I feel this discussion drives a bit away to a more general topic about x86 in general. Could we come back to the original point?
470 2020-02-06T19:20:18  <hebasto> even not all libs are available for x86
471 2020-02-06T19:20:31  <luke-jr> hebasto: ⁈
472 2020-02-06T19:20:50  <harding> Removing it from the website to see if anyone complains while it's still easy to add it back makes sense to me.
473 2020-02-06T19:20:50  <hebasto> see Centos 32-bit repo
474 2020-02-06T19:21:20  <luke-jr> hebasto: that's too vague to mean anything to me
475 2020-02-06T19:21:52  <wumpus> yes, so let's remove it from the website, but still build x86_32 binaries for 0.19.1
476 2020-02-06T19:22:00  <MarcoFalke> +1
477 2020-02-06T19:22:03  <luke-jr> sgtm
478 2020-02-06T19:22:10  <wumpus> then for 0.20 stop building them
479 2020-02-06T19:22:44  <emilengler> ack
480 2020-02-06T19:22:55  <wumpus> #topic Mempool project update (jeremyrubin)
481 2020-02-06T19:23:02  <jeremyrubin> hola
482 2020-02-06T19:23:15  <jeremyrubin> So the first PR of the epoch mempool series has been merged
483 2020-02-06T19:23:37  <wumpus> congrats!
484 2020-02-06T19:23:42  <jeremyrubin> Thanks!
485 2020-02-06T19:23:44  <jeremyrubin> I've opened up the next step, which gets rid of this big cache we built during reorgs
486 2020-02-06T19:23:56  <jeremyrubin> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18063
487 2020-02-06T19:24:35  <jeremyrubin> Amiti's testing framework changes are making progress & seem good to go IMO
488 2020-02-06T19:24:38  <wumpus> good to know
489 2020-02-06T19:25:41  <jeremyrubin> It seems like there's been not too much attention on nanobench stuff, would be good to "just do it IMO" but I don't have many downstream toolchains
490 2020-02-06T19:25:43  <wumpus> which PR is that?
491 2020-02-06T19:25:51  <jeremyrubin> sorry scrambling for links...
492 2020-02-06T19:25:57  <wumpus> (Amiti's changes, I mean)
493 2020-02-06T19:25:59  <jeremyrubin> #18037
494 2020-02-06T19:26:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18037 | Util: Allow scheduler to be mocked by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #18037 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
495 2020-02-06T19:26:12  <jeremyrubin> and #18011
496 2020-02-06T19:26:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18011 | Replace current benchmarking framework with nanobench by martinus · Pull Request #18011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
497 2020-02-06T19:26:46  <jeremyrubin> Amiti has also opened up a new PR that carves out a good chunk of functionality for rebroadcasting
498 2020-02-06T19:26:54  <jeremyrubin> is amiti here? I can ping her
499 2020-02-06T19:26:57  <amiti> ya Im here
500 2020-02-06T19:26:58  <jeremyrubin> #18037
501 2020-02-06T19:27:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18037 | Util: Allow scheduler to be mocked by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #18037 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
502 2020-02-06T19:27:21  *** PaulTroon has quit IRC
503 2020-02-06T19:27:23  <wumpus> ok so add #18037 to high priority for review?
504 2020-02-06T19:27:24  <jeremyrubin> amiti: should people be taking a look at 18037 now?
505 2020-02-06T19:27:25  <amiti> #18038 is the rebroadcast subset
506 2020-02-06T19:27:25  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18037 | Util: Allow scheduler to be mocked by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #18037 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
507 2020-02-06T19:27:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18038 | P2P: Mempool tracks locally submitted transactions to improve privacy by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #18038 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
508 2020-02-06T19:27:46  <jeremyrubin> Ah right sorry
509 2020-02-06T19:28:07  <amiti> if 18038 builds on 18037, so if 18037 gets merged in current state then 18038 is ready for review
510 2020-02-06T19:28:30  <jeremyrubin> yes so I think 18037 is hi prio and can be merged with another ack or two (it's just testing stuff)
511 2020-02-06T19:28:53  <jeremyrubin> And then we can pull some ears (not yet hi-prio) for 18038
512 2020-02-06T19:29:32  <jonatack> jeremyrubin: perhaps add #18044 to your mempool dashboard? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/14
513 2020-02-06T19:29:34  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18044 | Use wtxid for transaction relay by sdaftuar · Pull Request #18044 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
514 2020-02-06T19:29:37  <wumpus> ok
515 2020-02-06T19:29:38  <jeremyrubin> Same goes for #18063 -- once I get a reviewer or two I'd like to put it high priority so that progress can keep moving
516 2020-02-06T19:29:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18063 | Improve UpdateForDescendants by using Epochs and Removing CacheMap by JeremyRubin · Pull Request #18063 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
517 2020-02-06T19:30:12  <jeremyrubin> is 18044 needed for package relay?
518 2020-02-06T19:30:49  <jonatack> no, part of it changes the mempool, up to you
519 2020-02-06T19:30:55  <jeremyrubin> is sdaftuar here and can talk more about it?
520 2020-02-06T19:31:22  <jeremyrubin> I'll add it but from what I can tell this one requires a BIP to move forward?
521 2020-02-06T19:31:41  <jonatack> yes, there is a wip bip draft for now
522 2020-02-06T19:31:43  <sipa> i believe sdaftuar is working on one
523 2020-02-06T19:32:27  <jeremyrubin> Ok great. I'll add it to the package relay track since that's mostly sdaftuar right now anyways, but I think logically it seems more on rebroadcasting
524 2020-02-06T19:32:41  <jeremyrubin> amiti do you have any thoughts on that? Can you review 18044?
525 2020-02-06T19:32:58  <jonatack> WIP BIP draft https://github.com/sdaftuar/bips/blob/2020-02-wtxid-relay/bip-wtxid-relay.mediawiki
526 2020-02-06T19:33:02  <amiti> yeah I've started taking a look, its more about initial broadcast than rebroadcast
527 2020-02-06T19:33:36  <jeremyrubin> (and then I think we're good on mempool project unless anyone has any questions -- please see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/14 to get references for what to review & look at)
528 2020-02-06T19:34:23  *** afk11 has quit IRC
529 2020-02-06T19:34:48  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2020-02-06T19:34:56  <luke-jr> …
531 2020-02-06T19:35:06  <jeremyrubin> ?
532 2020-02-06T19:35:16  <wumpus> #topic the library for #17950 (emilengler)
533 2020-02-06T19:35:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17950 | gui: Check the strength of an encryption password by emilengler · Pull Request #17950 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
534 2020-02-06T19:35:33  <wumpus> I *really* do not like introducing a dependency for this
535 2020-02-06T19:35:35  <emilengler> thanks
536 2020-02-06T19:35:42  <emilengler> I agree with wumpus
537 2020-02-06T19:36:00  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Please no dependency for a gimmick feature
538 2020-02-06T19:36:05  <wumpus> it's somewhat nice to display a measure of password strength (if people can ever agree on one), but it's not worth large changes to our build process for
539 2020-02-06T19:36:09  <sipa> i feel that anything that self-written is going to be too ad-hoc to be useful
540 2020-02-06T19:36:10  <wumpus> exactly
541 2020-02-06T19:36:10  <jonasschnelli> It is already handholding...
542 2020-02-06T19:36:24  <sipa> so either it's depending on a well-maintained library, or we don't do it at all
543 2020-02-06T19:36:24  <jeremyrubin> I think i'd rather just *suggest* a strong password
544 2020-02-06T19:36:25  <luke-jr> there's conceptual problems in the first place
545 2020-02-06T19:36:47  <wumpus> maybe it's a bad idea in the first place, thinking of it, we don't want to encourage a specific kind of password scheme, this only reduces security
546 2020-02-06T19:36:52  <luke-jr> this shouldn't be a "strong" password, it should be a memorable one
547 2020-02-06T19:36:56  <jeremyrubin> e.g., here are 12 random words
548 2020-02-06T19:37:04  <wumpus> that, too
549 2020-02-06T19:37:13  <luke-jr> encrypted wallets won't stop malware, just little brother
550 2020-02-06T19:37:30  <luke-jr> the risk of losing access outweighs the benefits of a string passphrase here
551 2020-02-06T19:37:32  <jonasschnelli> Can we just have a short text to help people do the right thing? Or a link (less likely)?
552 2020-02-06T19:37:32  <wumpus> it's not a brainwallet, not the entire internet can attack it, the security needed depends on how secure the wallet file is kept
553 2020-02-06T19:37:46  <gwillen> it is very hard to make a password-strength indicator that is not at least sometimes very misleading
554 2020-02-06T19:37:56  <wumpus> making it too strong might cause people to forgt it
555 2020-02-06T19:38:00  <MarcoFalke> I think more people have lost coins due to forgetting too strong passwords than first getting their wallet stolen, but not their password, and then got their password cracked offline
556 2020-02-06T19:38:02  <wumpus> which is much worse
557 2020-02-06T19:38:11  <jonasschnelli> Indeed
558 2020-02-06T19:38:11  <sipa> gwillen: zxcvbn seems pretty sophisticated already
559 2020-02-06T19:38:14  <sipa> *actually
560 2020-02-06T19:38:15  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: agree
561 2020-02-06T19:38:30  <sipa> it's very hard because users probably don't have a good intuition for what the requirements are
562 2020-02-06T19:38:30  <wumpus> what would be nice is a feature that makes people write down their HD seed
563 2020-02-06T19:38:39  <wumpus> aid recovery, not make it worse
564 2020-02-06T19:38:45  <jeremyrubin> (I'm actually recovering a wallet for someone who forgot their password, so I agree)
565 2020-02-06T19:38:45  <MarcoFalke> yeah
566 2020-02-06T19:39:01  <wumpus> a lot of people lose their coins either by losing their wallet or paspphrase
567 2020-02-06T19:39:01  <sipa> if the wallet.dat file leaking is an attack vector you want to protect against, the password needs to be *far* stronger than common recommendations for website login passwords
568 2020-02-06T19:39:03  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: you mean adding BIP39 support?
569 2020-02-06T19:39:06  <jeremyrubin> * attempting that is, let's hope the fragments are good enough
570 2020-02-06T19:39:28  <gwillen> sipa: as such things go, it's pretty sophisticated, but it does not know your dog's name, or your mother's maiden name, or your birthday, or your favorite book you're quoting from, or any of a number of stupid things users do that lower effective entropy
571 2020-02-06T19:39:40  <gwillen> while not lowering apparent entropy relative to the tool's model
572 2020-02-06T19:39:41  <luke-jr> sipa: but if the wallet.dat file leaks, you probably have a keylogger on your PC anyway, so..
573 2020-02-06T19:39:45  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: yes I suppose
574 2020-02-06T19:39:53  <sipa> gwillen: of course it can only give an upper bound
575 2020-02-06T19:40:00  <gwillen> it's never presented that way, though
576 2020-02-06T19:40:12  <sipa> anyway
577 2020-02-06T19:40:25  <sipa> i'm in favor of just not pursuing that feature
578 2020-02-06T19:40:31  <jeremyrubin> luke-jr: disagree with those priors
579 2020-02-06T19:40:35  <sipa> it's too hard to do right
580 2020-02-06T19:40:35  <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: ?
581 2020-02-06T19:40:48  <jeremyrubin> [11:39] <luke-jr> sipa: but if the wallet.dat file leaks, you probably have a keylogger on your PC anyway, so..
582 2020-02-06T19:40:48  <MarcoFalke> Yeah, we should recommend users use a shorter password, if anything
583 2020-02-06T19:40:51  <sipa> luke-jr: wallet.dat files get backed up
584 2020-02-06T19:40:59  <wumpus> luke-jr: they might copy it to a cloud service or something
585 2020-02-06T19:41:00  <sipa> MarcoFalke: i disagree with that as well
586 2020-02-06T19:41:02  <luke-jr> sipa: hopefully encrypted!
587 2020-02-06T19:41:04  <jeremyrubin> I think it's relatively likely you leak your file but don't get a keylogger
588 2020-02-06T19:41:13  <sipa> luke-jr: right, but in that case, the passphrase needs to be strong
589 2020-02-06T19:41:25  <luke-jr> sipa: no, I mean encrpying the file itself
590 2020-02-06T19:41:26  <jeremyrubin> e.g., keeping backups on thumb drives
591 2020-02-06T19:41:36  *** timothy has quit IRC
592 2020-02-06T19:42:01  <sipa> luke-jr: it's hard to assume that people will use a strong password for an encrypted backup, but then not one inside the file?
593 2020-02-06T19:42:15  <luke-jr> perhaps we should put a suggestion to that effect somewhere
594 2020-02-06T19:42:16  <wumpus> in any case, there's no disagreement about whether the wallet encryption is useful or not, that's not the topic
595 2020-02-06T19:42:17  <sipa> i disagree that in general we should advise weak passwords
596 2020-02-06T19:42:33  <wumpus> no, we shouldn't advise that
597 2020-02-06T19:42:45  <MarcoFalke> ok, we shouldn't advise on weak passwords, but we might want to explain the tradeoffs
598 2020-02-06T19:42:53  <sipa> MarcoFalke: yes
599 2020-02-06T19:42:59  <wumpus> that would make sense, yes
600 2020-02-06T19:43:02  <wumpus> add an explanation
601 2020-02-06T19:43:03  <MarcoFalke> I.e. what the password protects against and what it does not protect against
602 2020-02-06T19:43:07  <sipa> "Losing this password will make your funds irrecoverably lost"
603 2020-02-06T19:43:28  <jeremyrubin> I think also saying "writing down the password in a notebook is probably better than not having one"
604 2020-02-06T19:43:36  <jonatack> https://www.xkcd.com/936/
605 2020-02-06T19:43:37  <jeremyrubin> Or something to that effect
606 2020-02-06T19:43:38  <jonasschnelli> I'm all for informing (text based) rather then applying rules that only works for certain use cases
607 2020-02-06T19:43:48  <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: it really depends on your risk exposure
608 2020-02-06T19:43:53  <jeremyrubin> I think people don't know that the password is not a seed
609 2020-02-06T19:44:14  <jeremyrubin> if you just write down the password but they don't have the wallet.dat it's fine
610 2020-02-06T19:44:44  <wumpus> jeremyrubin: yep, some people are confused by that
611 2020-02-06T19:44:45  <jeremyrubin> luke-jr: if someone remote compromises your computer but you have a sticky note with a long password on your screen you're "fine"
612 2020-02-06T19:45:06  <wumpus> because most wallets work with seeds nowadays
613 2020-02-06T19:45:07  <jeremyrubin> (until you type it in, but let's assume read only compromise)
614 2020-02-06T19:45:09  <jonasschnelli> The wallet encryption should be better explained. I would not wonder if some users encrypt their watch only wallets in the hope to not leak metadata to computer wide text pattern searches, etc.
615 2020-02-06T19:45:21  <wumpus> agree with jonasschnelli on adding explanation text
616 2020-02-06T19:45:38  <luke-jr> you can't encrypt watch-only I thought?
617 2020-02-06T19:45:44  <emilengler> I think it may be a good way to add a way to encrypt the wallet in the intro dialog
618 2020-02-06T19:45:45  <jonasschnelli> Can't you?
619 2020-02-06T19:45:46  <hebasto> explanation is good
620 2020-02-06T19:46:05  <wumpus> only private keys are encrypted, so encrypting watch-only would be a no-op
621 2020-02-06T19:46:07  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: what would it even do?
622 2020-02-06T19:46:07  <sipa> jonasschnelli: of course not
623 2020-02-06T19:46:10  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: I guess you can because its mostly a mixed situation
624 2020-02-06T19:46:13  <sipa> what would there be to encrypt?
625 2020-02-06T19:46:25  <jonasschnelli> sipa: thats exactly the problem
626 2020-02-06T19:46:32  <jonasschnelli> people expect things are encrypted
627 2020-02-06T19:46:41  <wumpus> the metadata is never encrypted
628 2020-02-06T19:46:47  <jonasschnelli> while we only encrypt the keys
629 2020-02-06T19:46:52  <jonasschnelli> Yes. But we don't tell that to users
630 2020-02-06T19:47:01  <sipa> jonasschnelli: a no-key wallet can't be encrypted, i think?
631 2020-02-06T19:47:04  <luke-jr> it's obvious?
632 2020-02-06T19:47:12  <jonasschnelli> So,.. IRS grabs wallet.dat file and reads transaction comments
633 2020-02-06T19:47:16  <wumpus> this is why software needs documentation I guess
634 2020-02-06T19:47:22  <sipa> luke-jr: don't assume things are obvious
635 2020-02-06T19:47:22  <jeremyrubin> luke-jr: how is it obvious?
636 2020-02-06T19:47:31  <jeremyrubin> That they can open the wallet and see stuff and only pw to sign?
637 2020-02-06T19:47:35  <jonasschnelli> It's not obvious to most users
638 2020-02-06T19:47:37  <luke-jr> you open Bitcoin Core and see your metadata, without entry of passphrase
639 2020-02-06T19:47:51  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: well it doesn't ask th password at startup, only when you send
640 2020-02-06T19:47:52  <jonasschnelli> encryption means for most users data can't be read by someone no knowing the secret
641 2020-02-06T19:47:53  <jeremyrubin> Actually that sounds like a 2 birds one stone thing
642 2020-02-06T19:48:08  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: sure. But novice users don't understand that either
643 2020-02-06T19:48:15  <jeremyrubin> If people have to put their password in more often maybe they're less likely to forget it ;)
644 2020-02-06T19:48:23  <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: hmm!
645 2020-02-06T19:49:00  <jonasschnelli> I think adding more explanations on how the encryption work would be great in general
646 2020-02-06T19:49:05  <jonasschnelli> works
647 2020-02-06T19:49:21  <MarcoFalke> Opened an issue #18085
648 2020-02-06T19:49:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18085 | doc: Explain what the wallet password does · Issue #18085 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
649 2020-02-06T19:49:28  <jonasschnelli> Nice
650 2020-02-06T19:49:37  <wumpus> thanks
651 2020-02-06T19:49:46  <jeremyrubin> I think there's also a lot of room for improvements in what users have available, e.g. shamir's secret shares
652 2020-02-06T19:49:52  <jonasschnelli> We don't encrypt the wallet, we encrypt the keys
653 2020-02-06T19:50:29  <jonatack> I sense new options/config args in our future here
654 2020-02-06T19:50:32  <jeremyrubin> Even though we know multisig is better, user's are really struggling to do anything better than a plaintext wallet
655 2020-02-06T19:51:13  <luke-jr> not sure it makes sense to put any effort into pre-Taproot multisig at this point?
656 2020-02-06T19:51:16  <sipa> jeremyrubin: that's not really an option in a model where a wallet is a file and not a seed
657 2020-02-06T19:51:17  <wumpus> we should be careful only to add features that are actually used and useful though, don't want to end up with some GPG-like tool that does a zillion things but with a lot of pitfalls
658 2020-02-06T19:51:30  <jeremyrubin> Maybe organizing some discussion at coredev.tech would be good about conducting some user research to improve things.
659 2020-02-06T19:51:52  <kanzure> i'll add that to the list then.
660 2020-02-06T19:51:57  <kanzure> empirical user testing would be interesting
661 2020-02-06T19:51:59  <sipa> luke-jr: multisig support at this point means improving PSBT integration, i think
662 2020-02-06T19:52:02  <jeremyrubin> Can ask some of the ideo people to come by since they've been doing key managment UXs with a lot of projects
663 2020-02-06T19:52:08  <sipa> luke-jr: which we should definitely work on
664 2020-02-06T19:52:13  <luke-jr> good point
665 2020-02-06T19:52:17  <kanzure> i'd prefer to forego ideo
666 2020-02-06T19:52:20  <jeremyrubin> sipa: you can still do point-in-time non seed backups
667 2020-02-06T19:52:35  <jeremyrubin> kanzure: Any specific reason?
668 2020-02-06T19:53:09  <jonasschnelli> let's not sidetrack this topic. :)
669 2020-02-06T19:53:21  <sipa> yes please
670 2020-02-06T19:53:48  <wumpus> maybe more apprpriate for the wallet meeting, too
671 2020-02-06T19:53:59  <sipa> yeah
672 2020-02-06T19:54:34  <wumpus> not that we have any more topics for today
673 2020-02-06T19:54:45  <sdaftuar> hi - i'm back, if anyone has questions about wtxid-relay i can discus
674 2020-02-06T19:55:03  <jeremyrubin> yay! please do
675 2020-02-06T19:55:04  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: There was a question whether it was needed for package relay
676 2020-02-06T19:55:50  <sdaftuar> i think it's a nice-to-have, but non-essential
677 2020-02-06T19:56:12  <sdaftuar> nice-to-have only because any tx-relay protocol change we make in the future (like erlay, or dandelion, etc) should be done on wtxid-based relay
678 2020-02-06T19:56:17  <jeremyrubin> I guess more concretely where it fits into the https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/14 workflow and where you think it belongs timeline wise
679 2020-02-06T19:56:56  <sdaftuar> well, i'm probably personally gated on it, as i don't want to work on more p2p relay things based on txid-relay at this point
680 2020-02-06T19:57:04  <jeremyrubin> Like if new rebroadcasting stuff like what amiti is working on should be done on wtxids then do we try to slot this before it
681 2020-02-06T19:57:08  <sdaftuar> barring some reason that wtxid-relay is a problem
682 2020-02-06T19:57:18  <jeremyrubin> ah ok; so it slots before further package relay work for you
683 2020-02-06T19:57:39  <luke-jr> I never really understood why we didn't do wtxid-relay from the start
684 2020-02-06T19:57:51  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: we shoudl have! the second best time is now
685 2020-02-06T19:57:53  <jeremyrubin> we didn't have wtxids before segwit
686 2020-02-06T19:57:53  <luke-jr> (or if I did, I forgot)
687 2020-02-06T19:58:01  <sdaftuar> it was just more work, and we were busy
688 2020-02-06T19:58:22  <sdaftuar> but i think it's pretty straightforward, and we should do it, ideally before we make a standardness change to segwit transactions
689 2020-02-06T19:58:31  <jonatack> ack
690 2020-02-06T19:58:33  <sipa> i think initially it wasn't that clear that it was needed in the first place
691 2020-02-06T19:58:49  <sipa> and when segwit was further along, it got pushed back to "later"
692 2020-02-06T19:58:52  <sipa> seems later is now
693 2020-02-06T19:58:55  <wumpus> 1 minute left
694 2020-02-06T19:59:01  <sdaftuar> yeah i'm not sure how much anyone thought about it until petertodd pointed out the issues in #8279
695 2020-02-06T19:59:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8279 | Mempool DoS risk in segwit due to malleated transactions · Issue #8279 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
696 2020-02-06T19:59:29  <jeremyrubin> My only concern looking at the code is that a new index in maptx kinda sucks
697 2020-02-06T19:59:53  <sdaftuar> a bit more memory, but i don't see a way around it, and i think the tradeoff is well worth the benefit
698 2020-02-06T20:00:03  <sipa> DING DONG
699 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <wumpus> #endmeeting
700 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Feb  6 20:00:06 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
701 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-02-06-19.00.html
702 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-02-06-19.00.txt
703 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-02-06-19.00.log.html
704 2020-02-06T20:00:06  <luke-jr> could we add both entries to the same index?
705 2020-02-06T20:00:15  <hebasto> luke-jr: missed 32-bit packages in CentOS 7 repos - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17900#issuecomment-572697411
706 2020-02-06T20:00:17  <luke-jr> maybe no benefit
707 2020-02-06T20:00:19  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: we need to look up by both txid and wtxid
708 2020-02-06T20:00:23  <sdaftuar> so two keys
709 2020-02-06T20:00:31  <gwillen> so while people are here, and speaking of PSBT which got mentioned earlier -- I would love to see more reviews of 18027
710 2020-02-06T20:00:34  <sdaftuar> we use the boost multiindex already, which i think is pretty efficient?
711 2020-02-06T20:00:34  <gwillen> er, #18027
712 2020-02-06T20:00:37  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18027 | "PSBT Operations" dialog by gwillen · Pull Request #18027 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
713 2020-02-06T20:00:49  <jonatack> (fwiw... did we finish the blockers/hi-prio part?)
714 2020-02-06T20:01:05  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: you can actually reuse the saltedtxid hasher across both indexes I think
715 2020-02-06T20:01:12  <sipa> sdaftuar: i need to revive my use-allocator-to-count-multiindex-memory-use stuff... i'm not sure how accurate we currently are
716 2020-02-06T20:01:14  <luke-jr> hebasto: I would assume anyone building for 32-bit is using 32-bit to do it
717 2020-02-06T20:01:24  <luke-jr> hebasto: and not everyone uses CentOS
718 2020-02-06T20:02:02  <sdaftuar> sipa: ah yes i have no idea how to do that, if you can advise on how to update the memory calculation better than i did in the PR, please let me know
719 2020-02-06T20:02:15  <jonatack> ^ +1
720 2020-02-06T20:02:16  <sdaftuar> jeremyrubin: i don't think i follow
721 2020-02-06T20:02:48  <sipa> sdaftuar: i have some WIP code that i can probably use to verify whether or current heuristic is accurate... actually replacing it is probably harder
722 2020-02-06T20:03:24  <aj> is #14895 really still chasing concept ack?
723 2020-02-06T20:03:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14895 | Package relay design questions · Issue #14895 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
724 2020-02-06T20:03:58  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: I need to think about it a little bit. Fundamentally you want to be able to index by either TXID or WTXID
725 2020-02-06T20:04:34  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
726 2020-02-06T20:04:51  <jeremyrubin> But because it's a hash table there's a lot of extra overhead (idk what load the boost table works well till)
727 2020-02-06T20:05:04  <jeremyrubin> Just trying to think if there's a way to be able to index by either
728 2020-02-06T20:06:57  <jeremyrubin> Do you envision that we ever remove the txid index?
729 2020-02-06T20:07:08  <sdaftuar> we can't do that very easily
730 2020-02-06T20:07:09  <jeremyrubin> Or you think it's there forever for compat
731 2020-02-06T20:07:14  <sdaftuar> because transactions reference inputs by txid
732 2020-02-06T20:07:22  <jeremyrubin> right
733 2020-02-06T20:07:23  <sipa> jeremyrubin: UTXOs are indexed by txid
734 2020-02-06T20:07:24  <luke-jr> hmm
735 2020-02-06T20:07:25  <sdaftuar> so unless someone gave you a hint for what wtxid to look for, you're screwed
736 2020-02-06T20:07:58  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: well, only for mempool-spending txs?
737 2020-02-06T20:08:00  <jeremyrubin> OK I'm OK with it
738 2020-02-06T20:08:03  <jeremyrubin> BUT
739 2020-02-06T20:08:06  <sdaftuar> i think in the case of package relay though, i might imagine that we'll get those hints, but not in a generic enough way that we could ever git rid of the index
740 2020-02-06T20:08:09  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: right
741 2020-02-06T20:08:11  <jeremyrubin> You have to review my next two PRs first
742 2020-02-06T20:08:20  <jeremyrubin> Because I get rid of mapTxLinks
743 2020-02-06T20:08:22  <luke-jr> could hypothetically use wtxids in the tx structure there, and continue to use just the txids for signatures?
744 2020-02-06T20:08:25  <jeremyrubin> which can pay for this new index ;)
745 2020-02-06T20:08:34  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: that would be a big relay change though
746 2020-02-06T20:08:48  <luke-jr> maybe worth it long-term
747 2020-02-06T20:08:49  <sdaftuar> and it just seems like a lot of edge cases would break
748 2020-02-06T20:08:56  <sdaftuar> yeah, i can't rule it out
749 2020-02-06T20:09:01  <sipa> i don't understand what the point is
750 2020-02-06T20:09:03  <luke-jr> gotta run
751 2020-02-06T20:09:17  <sipa> not having wtxids in transactions is exactly what segwit made possible
752 2020-02-06T20:09:28  <sdaftuar> yes :)
753 2020-02-06T20:09:44  <sdaftuar> i think saving a little memory is not worth the effort here
754 2020-02-06T20:10:18  <kanzure> i think the point was something about rebroadcast logic or first-seen issues?
755 2020-02-06T20:10:25  <kanzure> right, bad witnesses or something?
756 2020-02-06T20:10:30  <jeremyrubin> Yeah, I think given that we're going to kill mapTxLinks it's going to be fine (I just don't want people to have a reason not to upgrade to wtxid index)
757 2020-02-06T20:10:43  <jeremyrubin> kanzure: anyone can malleate witnesses
758 2020-02-06T20:10:56  <sdaftuar> jeremyrubin: i don't think this has anything to do with mapTxLinks though?  i didn't need to touch it for the wtxid-relay PR
759 2020-02-06T20:11:16  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: I'm saying that one of the PRs I pinged you on kills mapTxLinks
760 2020-02-06T20:11:19  <sdaftuar> (unless i am missing something!)
761 2020-02-06T20:11:25  <sdaftuar> right, i imagine that should be fine
762 2020-02-06T20:11:45  <jeremyrubin> so the memory/hashing overhead going away there is probably the same as a new index
763 2020-02-06T20:12:08  <sdaftuar> one way to think about this is that only the net_processing layer needs to be able to look things up in the mempool by wtxid
764 2020-02-06T20:12:18  <sdaftuar> as that's the only place in our code where we need to deteremine whether we already have a wtxid someone is offering
765 2020-02-06T20:12:21  <jeremyrubin> So I'm OK with not introducing a regression
766 2020-02-06T20:12:29  <sdaftuar> anything internal to the mempool is unaffected by this change
767 2020-02-06T20:12:30  <jeremyrubin> Because we have a way to pay for it
768 2020-02-06T20:12:54  <sdaftuar> oh, you're saying that the extra memory is a wash with those other changes?  even better :)
769 2020-02-06T20:12:58  <jeremyrubin> Yes
770 2020-02-06T20:13:03  <kanzure> sipa: i assume this https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18044
771 2020-02-06T20:13:25  <jeremyrubin> https://github.com/JeremyRubin/bitcoin/pull/7
772 2020-02-06T20:13:32  <sipa> kanzure: yes that's what we're talking about
773 2020-02-06T20:13:40  *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
774 2020-02-06T20:14:02  <sipa> jeremyrubin: seems completely unrelated; we need wtxid based relay i think, and even if the only way to do it is by adding memory, we should
775 2020-02-06T20:14:32  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar previously said it was nice ot have but not required
776 2020-02-06T20:15:07  <sipa> and if we can get rid of mapTxLinks, we should, unrelated of wtxid based relay
777 2020-02-06T20:15:19  <sdaftuar> jeremyrubin: that was for package relay
778 2020-02-06T20:15:25  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
779 2020-02-06T20:15:26  <jeremyrubin> ah
780 2020-02-06T20:15:27  <sdaftuar> i think package relay could be done with or without wtxid relay
781 2020-02-06T20:15:36  <sdaftuar> but wtxid relay is required to solve some bandwidth-waste issues
782 2020-02-06T20:15:37  <jeremyrubin> I thought you meant in general
783 2020-02-06T20:15:58  <jeremyrubin> sipa: I just don't want there to be a reason for economic nodes to not upgrade that's all
784 2020-02-06T20:16:13  <jeremyrubin> the changes are obviously independent
785 2020-02-06T20:16:20  <sdaftuar> the issue we have with txid relay is that when a peer announces a segwit transaction that doesn't pass your policy checks, then you don't know whether another peer announcing the same txid has the same transactionr or not
786 2020-02-06T20:16:26  <sdaftuar> because maybe just the witness was malleated
787 2020-02-06T20:16:34  <jeremyrubin> But that we're not increasing overheads overall means we can not worry at all
788 2020-02-06T20:16:39  <sdaftuar> so you have to download it (otherwise, an attacker could malleate transactions to interfere with relay)
789 2020-02-06T20:17:01  <sdaftuar> and this is wasteful, particularly after a policy change to segwit-transaction-acceptance (eg taproot, or any other policy change)
790 2020-02-06T20:17:15  <sdaftuar> when you would expect old nodes to reject a certain category of new transaction
791 2020-02-06T20:17:55  *** tryphe has quit IRC
792 2020-02-06T20:18:04  <sdaftuar> there's also a related CPU DoS issue with how we determine whether a transaction is witness-stripped, which will be alleviated in the future when we no longer need to worry about adding txid's for segwit transactions to our reject filter
793 2020-02-06T20:18:54  *** alec has quit IRC
794 2020-02-06T20:18:55  <sdaftuar> so i think we definitely need wtxid relay, even if we support txid-based-relay indefinitely to support old software
795 2020-02-06T20:20:47  *** Talkless has quit IRC
796 2020-02-06T20:21:04  <jeremyrubin> I guess it's not clear to me why this has to be a new mempool index rather than a fixed size separate cache only in net_proc
797 2020-02-06T20:21:09  <jeremyrubin> will look more closely
798 2020-02-06T20:21:28  <sdaftuar> jeremyrubin: i think code simplicity?
799 2020-02-06T20:21:37  <sipa> jeremyrubin: for my current mempool, the extra index would be a 0.55% memory usage increase
800 2020-02-06T20:22:05  <sdaftuar> maintaining a separate data structure just to shave a few bytes doesn't seem worth the effort to me. the mempool is probably already too big
801 2020-02-06T20:22:07  <jeremyrubin> sipa: I'm concerned with hashing too, we're slowing down all inserts
802 2020-02-06T20:22:16  <aj> yeah, extra indexes on multi_index are pretty cheap
803 2020-02-06T20:22:43  <sdaftuar> inserts aren't in the critical path of block acceptance, i think they're small compared to transaction validation speeds
804 2020-02-06T20:22:50  <sipa> yeah
805 2020-02-06T20:23:14  <jeremyrubin> Cool -- these are all good things to document & measure in advocating this change
806 2020-02-06T20:23:20  <sdaftuar> if you want to worry about CPU usage in transaction acceptance, we should reopen by parallel-script-check-thread PR for mempool acceptance
807 2020-02-06T20:23:39  <sdaftuar> (i do worry about it, but i think the mempool data structures are far from our biggest concern)
808 2020-02-06T20:23:49  <sipa> just assume all transactions are valid ethereum style
809 2020-02-06T20:23:59  <sdaftuar> :)
810 2020-02-06T20:24:00  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
811 2020-02-06T20:24:01  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: after I finish the 100th epoch mempool patch I'll do that
812 2020-02-06T20:25:12  <sdaftuar> sipa: we could just have every node randomly sample transactions to run script checking on, and turn back on sending reject messages, and whenever you learn of a reject from a peer you validate it yourself
813 2020-02-06T20:25:28  <sdaftuar> <runs away>
814 2020-02-06T20:25:54  <sipa> haha
815 2020-02-06T20:30:08  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: actually you do a ZKP over your mempool proving it has no invalid txns
816 2020-02-06T20:30:35  <jeremyrubin> you do a interactive setup with each peer so it's trustless
817 2020-02-06T20:30:44  <sipa> lol
818 2020-02-06T20:31:22  <aj> jeremyrubin: and that uses less cpu, right?
819 2020-02-06T20:31:41  <sipa> aj: you do it in the cloud
820 2020-02-06T20:32:00  <aj> sipa: i don't trust the cloud, that makes it trustless, right?
821 2020-02-06T20:32:02  <jeremyrubin> aj: you don't care who generates the proof for your setup string
822 2020-02-06T20:32:42  <jeremyrubin> so you outsource proving batches of transactions correct to the miners, who get paid for getting them accepted, or the users whose txns it is
823 2020-02-06T20:32:52  <jeremyrubin> maybe this is better for #wizards ;)
824 2020-02-06T20:33:04  <sipa> yes
825 2020-02-06T20:35:18  <aj> sdaftuar: did you see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17303#issuecomment-581363980 ? there's a patch there that's a different approach for #15505 ; worth trying? (seems silly to add wtxid for mapRelay if we could just get rid of mapRelay first instead)
826 2020-02-06T20:35:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15505 | p2p: Request NOTFOUND transactions immediately from other outbound peers, when possible by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15505 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
827 2020-02-06T20:36:40  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
828 2020-02-06T20:37:32  <sdaftuar> aj: i would definitely prefer to get rid of mapRelay, but i think the additional memory i propose using in #18044 is very minor, it's just an extra key
829 2020-02-06T20:37:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18044 | Use wtxid for transaction relay by sdaftuar · Pull Request #18044 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
830 2020-02-06T20:37:56  <sdaftuar> and it should be easy to remove either before or after the wtxid-relay PR
831 2020-02-06T20:38:10  <sdaftuar> (if we can get rid of mapRelay before, i can easily pull that commit out of my branch)
832 2020-02-06T20:39:26  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
833 2020-02-06T20:39:41  <aj> sdaftuar: oh, yeah, not a meaningful criticism
834 2020-02-06T20:40:50  <jeremyrubin> sdaftuar: btw can you re-run your reorg benchmark on #18063 for equal comparison to prior work?
835 2020-02-06T20:40:52  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18063 | Improve UpdateForDescendants by using Epochs and Removing CacheMap by JeremyRubin · Pull Request #18063 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
836 2020-02-06T20:41:12  <sdaftuar> jeremyrubin: uh i will try to dig it up again :)  thanks for reminding though, i'll take a look
837 2020-02-06T20:41:47  <jeremyrubin> if you find it and can run it commit-by-commit that would help (there are only 2)
838 2020-02-06T20:42:30  <sdaftuar> gotcha, will give it a try
839 2020-02-06T20:51:42  *** bsm1175321 has quit IRC
840 2020-02-06T20:51:55  *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
841 2020-02-06T20:53:40  *** emilengler has quit IRC
842 2020-02-06T21:00:02  *** mota1 has quit IRC
843 2020-02-06T21:08:15  *** goatpig has quit IRC
844 2020-02-06T21:18:42  *** mkrautz1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
845 2020-02-06T21:19:17  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
846 2020-02-06T21:36:28  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
847 2020-02-06T21:37:51  *** manantial has quit IRC
848 2020-02-06T21:43:42  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
849 2020-02-06T22:04:07  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
850 2020-02-06T22:23:32  *** francisco_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
851 2020-02-06T22:28:23  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
852 2020-02-06T22:34:07  *** promag_ has quit IRC
853 2020-02-06T22:43:26  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
854 2020-02-06T22:56:08  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
855 2020-02-06T22:57:42  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
856 2020-02-06T22:58:13  *** PaulTroon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
857 2020-02-06T23:02:16  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
858 2020-02-06T23:06:51  *** promag_ has quit IRC
859 2020-02-06T23:19:12  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
860 2020-02-06T23:23:57  *** promag_ has quit IRC
861 2020-02-06T23:24:15  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
862 2020-02-06T23:25:37  *** Zenton has quit IRC
863 2020-02-06T23:29:34  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
864 2020-02-06T23:35:15  *** molly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
865 2020-02-06T23:36:59  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
866 2020-02-06T23:38:49  *** molz_ has quit IRC
867 2020-02-06T23:56:51  *** mdunnio has quit IRC