1 2020-10-20T00:00:02  *** lliehu has quit IRC
  2 2020-10-20T00:14:07  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2020-10-20T00:15:55  *** promag has quit IRC
  4 2020-10-20T00:16:38  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2020-10-20T00:22:20  *** bitprophet1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2020-10-20T00:25:56  <emzy> sipa: done
  7 2020-10-20T00:27:41  <sipa> dank
  8 2020-10-20T00:28:48  <emzy> :)
  9 2020-10-20T00:42:52  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
 10 2020-10-20T00:44:19  <yanmaani> Are there any benchmarks on Bitcoin Core's RPC done?
 11 2020-10-20T00:44:29  <yanmaani> If I make a blockchain explorer, will it pose a problem?
 12 2020-10-20T00:52:41  *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2020-10-20T00:56:42  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2020-10-20T00:59:01  *** mol has quit IRC
 15 2020-10-20T00:59:54  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2020-10-20T01:00:52  *** Mercury_Vapor has quit IRC
 17 2020-10-20T01:04:00  *** mol_ has quit IRC
 18 2020-10-20T01:05:46  *** Mercury_Vapor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2020-10-20T01:05:47  *** sr_gi has quit IRC
 20 2020-10-20T01:06:18  *** sr_gi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2020-10-20T01:08:36  *** willcl_ark has quit IRC
 22 2020-10-20T01:10:52  *** willcl_ark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2020-10-20T01:16:54  <luke-jr> sipa: this doesn't look exploitable?
 24 2020-10-20T01:17:39  <luke-jr> yanmaani: no, you can't rely on deprecated getrawtransaction behaviour - enable txindex instead
 25 2020-10-20T01:26:01  <yanmaani> luke-jr: Thanks. Can I use that with a pruned blockchain? What RPC does that unlock?
 26 2020-10-20T01:26:58  <luke-jr> no, you can't..
 27 2020-10-20T01:27:11  <luke-jr> I'm not sure the deprecated functionality would work either
 28 2020-10-20T01:27:18  <luke-jr> getrawtransaction uses txindex
 29 2020-10-20T01:27:57  <yanmaani> So there's no alternative to getrawtransaction?
 30 2020-10-20T01:28:20  <luke-jr> to do what?
 31 2020-10-20T01:28:38  <yanmaani> Building a blockchain explorer
 32 2020-10-20T01:29:22  <yanmaani> So you want functionality like: start at txid X, look at addresses A, B, C, look at their txns Y, Z, and so on. So if I want info re: txid X, then I can do getrawtransaction <TXID>
 33 2020-10-20T01:29:26  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 34 2020-10-20T01:29:34  <aj> a pruned blockchain explorer?
 35 2020-10-20T01:29:56  <yanmaani> aj: Does pruning block me from doing txindex?
 36 2020-10-20T01:30:51  <yanmaani> (no pun intended)
 37 2020-10-20T01:31:04  <aj> pruning removes txs, so you can't explore the whole blockchain? afaik txindex requires a full history but not sure
 38 2020-10-20T01:32:59  <yanmaani> doesn't txindex copy it over to DB?
 39 2020-10-20T01:33:03  <luke-jr> yanmaani: an address should only ever have 1 transaction associated <.<
 40 2020-10-20T01:33:40  <yanmaani> I meant that A had txn Y, and B had txn Z, of course :)
 41 2020-10-20T01:36:15  <aj> yanmaani: txindex is an index -- it helps you find stuff in the database. if you remove stuff from the database it can't be found, no matter how good your index is
 42 2020-10-20T01:51:31  <yanmaani> Is there anything like txindex for addresses?
 43 2020-10-20T01:52:22  <aj> some PRs have been proposed for an address index
 44 2020-10-20T01:53:49  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 45 2020-10-20T01:55:38  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 46 2020-10-20T02:05:33  <yanmaani> aj: anything merged?
 47 2020-10-20T02:06:27  <aj> nah
 48 2020-10-20T02:08:04  <yanmaani> hm, #14053 seems nice
 49 2020-10-20T02:08:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14053 | Add address-based index (attempt 4?) by marcinja · Pull Request #14053 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 50 2020-10-20T02:27:49  <aj> hmm, has anyone gotten llvm memory sanitizer to work? seems to give a pretty quick failure in boost test setup for me
 51 2020-10-20T02:28:12  <luke-jr> aj: Isn't that the one that requires you to rebuild all your libraries too?
 52 2020-10-20T02:29:11  <sipa> yes it is
 53 2020-10-20T02:31:36  *** S3RK has quit IRC
 54 2020-10-20T02:32:09  <aj> ah, that would explain it then
 55 2020-10-20T02:32:58  <sipa> generally you do (ubsan and asan) or (tsan) or (msan, including all libs)
 56 2020-10-20T02:35:02  <yanmaani> How come gettxout works with all txids, but gettransaction only does wallet txns?
 57 2020-10-20T02:40:56  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2020-10-20T02:44:02  <yanmaani> Is there any PR/patch to add a TXO index?
 59 2020-10-20T02:54:08  <achow101> yanmaani: gettxout is a node rpc and accesses the txout set. it is limited to utxos. gettransaction is a wallet rpc, it accesses the wallet. it is limited to things in the wallet. you can use getrawtransaction to get arbitrary transactions, and enable txindex to get any arbitrary transaction
 60 2020-10-20T02:54:59  <achow101> note that getrawtransaction is also a node rpc and will not retrieve wallet transactions if they are not unspent and txindex isn't enabled
 61 2020-10-20T03:00:02  *** bitprophet1 has quit IRC
 62 2020-10-20T03:01:11  <yanmaani> achow101: getrawtransaction, that's the one thank you so much!
 63 2020-10-20T03:05:43  *** per has quit IRC
 64 2020-10-20T03:12:52  *** per has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2020-10-20T03:22:21  *** wilkie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2020-10-20T03:27:09  *** S3RK_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2020-10-20T03:33:53  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2020-10-20T03:33:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] S3RK opened pull request #20191: wallet, refactor: make DescriptorScriptPubKeyMan agnostic of internal flag (master...remove_m_internal) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20191
 69 2020-10-20T03:33:54  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2020-10-20T03:34:14  *** S3RK_ has quit IRC
 71 2020-10-20T03:42:09  *** glozow has quit IRC
 72 2020-10-20T03:45:50  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2020-10-20T03:50:12  *** promag_ has quit IRC
 74 2020-10-20T04:39:59  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 75 2020-10-20T04:40:30  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2020-10-20T05:15:19  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2020-10-20T05:15:55  *** sr_gi has quit IRC
 78 2020-10-20T05:16:28  *** sr_gi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2020-10-20T05:16:55  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2020-10-20T05:28:49  *** jonatack has quit IRC
 81 2020-10-20T05:30:12  *** brianhoffman has quit IRC
 82 2020-10-20T05:33:26  *** S3RK has quit IRC
 83 2020-10-20T05:59:18  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 84 2020-10-20T05:59:44  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2020-10-20T05:59:49  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2020-10-20T06:00:02  *** wilkie has quit IRC
 87 2020-10-20T06:06:01  *** gribble has quit IRC
 88 2020-10-20T06:06:38  *** tralfaz has quit IRC
 89 2020-10-20T06:10:51  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2020-10-20T06:18:56  *** andreacab has quit IRC
 91 2020-10-20T06:22:07  *** JohninLex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2020-10-20T06:30:26  *** JD2983 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2020-10-20T06:31:03  *** nsh has quit IRC
 94 2020-10-20T06:32:37  *** JD2983_ has quit IRC
 95 2020-10-20T06:35:09  *** nsh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2020-10-20T06:42:29  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2020-10-20T06:49:37  *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2020-10-20T06:57:42  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2020-10-20T06:57:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] yash2121ja opened pull request #20192: README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20192
100 2020-10-20T06:57:43  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2020-10-20T06:58:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2020-10-20T06:58:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #20192: README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20192
103 2020-10-20T06:58:18  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2020-10-20T06:58:33  *** Livestradamus has quit IRC
105 2020-10-20T06:58:54  *** Livestradamus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2020-10-20T07:03:07  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2020-10-20T07:03:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #20193: p2p: improve onion detection in AttemptToEvictConnection  (master...evict-inbound-onions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20193
108 2020-10-20T07:03:08  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
109 2020-10-20T07:08:30  *** andreacab has quit IRC
110 2020-10-20T07:08:58  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2020-10-20T07:13:29  *** andreacab has quit IRC
112 2020-10-20T07:24:19  *** BGL has quit IRC
113 2020-10-20T07:32:23  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2020-10-20T07:35:43  *** ghost43_ has quit IRC
115 2020-10-20T07:36:15  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2020-10-20T07:43:31  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2020-10-20T07:43:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #20190: net: Hardcoded seeds update for 0.20.1 (master...seeds) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20190
118 2020-10-20T07:43:32  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2020-10-20T07:52:18  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2020-10-20T08:00:44  *** promag has quit IRC
121 2020-10-20T08:00:59  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2020-10-20T08:02:44  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2020-10-20T08:08:46  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
124 2020-10-20T08:09:33  *** andreacab has quit IRC
125 2020-10-20T08:10:00  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-10-20T08:10:08  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2020-10-20T08:12:28  *** worc3131 has quit IRC
128 2020-10-20T08:13:36  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
129 2020-10-20T08:13:46  *** worc3131 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2020-10-20T08:13:55  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2020-10-20T08:14:25  *** andreacab has quit IRC
132 2020-10-20T08:22:13  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
133 2020-10-20T08:22:22  *** BGL has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2020-10-20T08:22:30  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
135 2020-10-20T08:24:34  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2020-10-20T08:31:02  <elichai2> Anyone else is getting a bunch of `-Wsuggest-override` warnings in the qt system headers?
137 2020-10-20T08:31:32  *** reallll has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
138 2020-10-20T08:32:19  <elichai2> It's all from the expansion of the `Q_OBJECT` macro
139 2020-10-20T08:34:55  *** belcher_ has quit IRC
140 2020-10-20T08:36:33  *** jonatack has quit IRC
141 2020-10-20T08:37:15  *** reallll is now known as belcher
142 2020-10-20T08:39:22  *** promag has quit IRC
143 2020-10-20T08:39:56  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2020-10-20T08:46:21  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2020-10-20T08:46:39  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-10-20T08:49:50  *** mol has quit IRC
147 2020-10-20T08:55:47  *** andreacab has quit IRC
148 2020-10-20T08:56:14  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
149 2020-10-20T08:56:38  *** promag has quit IRC
150 2020-10-20T08:56:55  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2020-10-20T08:57:44  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152 2020-10-20T08:57:44  *** promag has quit IRC
153 2020-10-20T08:57:52  <vasild> elichai2: yes, I think I got those
154 2020-10-20T08:59:28  <vasild> elichai2: "./configure --enable-suppress-external-warnings" should silence them
155 2020-10-20T09:00:02  *** JohninLex has quit IRC
156 2020-10-20T09:00:38  *** andreacab has quit IRC
157 2020-10-20T09:20:50  *** havenwood1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
158 2020-10-20T09:24:15  <vasild> How to make a functional test that is skipped by default in CI, but make it easy to run it manually?
159 2020-10-20T09:24:52  *** kyoo[m] has quit IRC
160 2020-10-20T09:24:53  *** awesome_doge has quit IRC
161 2020-10-20T09:24:54  *** rcrtn32002[m] has quit IRC
162 2020-10-20T09:24:55  *** icota[m] has quit IRC
163 2020-10-20T09:24:55  *** sethrogers23[m] has quit IRC
164 2020-10-20T09:25:01  *** Pasta[m] has quit IRC
165 2020-10-20T09:25:01  *** tianshi[m] has quit IRC
166 2020-10-20T09:25:15  *** TheFuzzStone[m] has quit IRC
167 2020-10-20T09:25:16  *** RaphalBentgeac[m has quit IRC
168 2020-10-20T09:25:18  *** snowkeld[m] has quit IRC
169 2020-10-20T09:25:27  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
170 2020-10-20T09:32:41  *** awesome_doge has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
171 2020-10-20T09:34:50  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2020-10-20T09:35:33  <jnewbery> vasild: look at EXTENDED_SCRIPTS in test/functional/test_runner.py
173 2020-10-20T09:36:23  <aj> jnewbery: hey, is p2p meeting in 5h30m ?
174 2020-10-20T09:36:46  <fanquake> aj: that's what I've got
175 2020-10-20T09:37:00  <jnewbery> Yes, it's in 5h30min
176 2020-10-20T09:37:34  <jnewbery> Are you out of daylight savings? It might make sense to shift the time for summer/winter
177 2020-10-20T09:37:35  <aj> sydney socratic's got daylight savings so suddenly i don't know what time anything is
178 2020-10-20T09:38:01  <aj> jnewbery: no daylight savings here, just +1000 UTC all year
179 2020-10-20T09:38:32  <fanquake> the east coast is a mess of daylight savings
180 2020-10-20T09:38:35  <vasild> jnewbery: ci/test/00_setup_env_native_qt5.sh:13:export TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA="--previous-releases --coverage --extended --exclude feature_dbcrash"
181 2020-10-20T09:39:01  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
182 2020-10-20T09:39:01  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2020-10-20T09:39:04  <vasild> extended tests may still be run by this CI?
184 2020-10-20T09:40:12  <jnewbery> aj: so I guess you're happy to keep it at the same time. It'll be an hour earlier for northern hemisphere folks, which might be upsetting for those on the US west coast
185 2020-10-20T09:40:29  <jnewbery> vasild: ah, you'd also need to add the name of your test to the end of that config line
186 2020-10-20T09:40:47  <vasild> What I tried is: I added a custom option to the script "--forcerun" and if it is not set then I raise SkipTest()
187 2020-10-20T09:41:40  <vasild> but the test is still run by travis, and I have no clue why. It must have detected the option and run it with that option set...
188 2020-10-20T09:42:28  <vasild> I tried running "test_runner.py --ci" locally, and the test is skipped as expected
189 2020-10-20T09:43:05  <vasild> jnewbery: that would be quite ugly, no?
190 2020-10-20T09:46:54  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2020-10-20T09:46:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #20195: build: fix mutex detection when building bdb on macOS (master...bdb_xcode12_implicit_function_decleration) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20195
192 2020-10-20T09:46:55  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** icota[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
194 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** kyoo[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** snowkeld[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** TheFuzzStone[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** sethrogers23[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** Pasta[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2020-10-20T09:48:35  *** rCapital-Surpris has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2020-10-20T09:48:41  *** tianshi[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2020-10-20T09:48:41  *** RaphalBentgeac[m has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2020-10-20T09:52:39  <jnewbery> vasild: People can live with ugly travis config I think :)
203 2020-10-20T09:53:30  *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
204 2020-10-20T09:53:56  <vasild> jnewbery: ok, maybe ugly was not the right word, but it is also fragile because it means that the test will be run whenever "test_runner.py --extended" is executed
205 2020-10-20T09:54:05  <vasild> and it will fail
206 2020-10-20T09:54:20  <vasild> sometimes I run "test_runner.py --extended" locally
207 2020-10-20T09:54:56  *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2020-10-20T09:54:59  <vasild> I guess other people also do and I do not want to impose "always run with --extended --exclude foo" otherwise you will get failure
209 2020-10-20T10:02:08  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2020-10-20T10:02:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] vasild opened pull request #20196: net: fix GetListenPort() to derive the proper port (master...fix_GetListenPort) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20196
211 2020-10-20T10:02:09  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2020-10-20T10:05:28  *** promag_ has quit IRC
213 2020-10-20T10:05:42  <vasild> jnewbery: I renamed the option from --forcerun to --ihave1111 and opened a PR, lets see if travis will still execute the code below this line: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20196/files#diff-6b91c5b0a9bd8c4d007ea9548808ae7ba98beb22ff236324d238815c68b3b8b1R62
214 2020-10-20T10:06:00  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2020-10-20T10:07:52  *** vasild_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2020-10-20T10:09:56  *** promag has quit IRC
217 2020-10-20T10:10:08  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2020-10-20T10:11:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
219 2020-10-20T10:11:04  *** vasild_ is now known as vasild
220 2020-10-20T10:11:05  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-10-20T10:16:03  *** shesek has quit IRC
222 2020-10-20T10:20:14  *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
223 2020-10-20T10:29:02  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2020-10-20T10:31:51  *** filchef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
225 2020-10-20T10:42:51  *** brianhoffman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2020-10-20T10:43:19  *** andreacab has quit IRC
227 2020-10-20T10:43:45  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2020-10-20T10:45:06  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2020-10-20T10:45:06  *** andreacab has quit IRC
230 2020-10-20T10:47:54  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
231 2020-10-20T10:48:20  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2020-10-20T10:50:48  *** andreacab has quit IRC
233 2020-10-20T10:51:00  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-10-20T10:52:02  *** S3RK has quit IRC
235 2020-10-20T11:06:33  *** sethrogers23[m] has left #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2020-10-20T11:22:48  *** murrayn has quit IRC
237 2020-10-20T11:23:07  *** murray_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2020-10-20T11:29:02  *** shesek has quit IRC
239 2020-10-20T11:29:18  *** andreacab has quit IRC
240 2020-10-20T11:29:46  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
241 2020-10-20T11:30:19  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2020-10-20T11:30:20  *** andreacab has quit IRC
243 2020-10-20T11:32:25  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
244 2020-10-20T11:32:59  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-10-20T11:33:26  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2020-10-20T11:35:31  *** andreacab has quit IRC
247 2020-10-20T11:36:00  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2020-10-20T11:36:35  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
249 2020-10-20T11:36:35  *** andreacab has quit IRC
250 2020-10-20T11:38:16  *** promag has quit IRC
251 2020-10-20T11:38:39  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
252 2020-10-20T11:38:50  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
253 2020-10-20T11:39:40  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
254 2020-10-20T11:41:46  *** andreacab has quit IRC
255 2020-10-20T11:42:47  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2020-10-20T11:44:53  *** andreacab has quit IRC
257 2020-10-20T11:45:54  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2020-10-20T11:47:59  *** andreacab has quit IRC
259 2020-10-20T11:48:29  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2020-10-20T11:49:00  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2020-10-20T11:49:00  *** andreacab has quit IRC
262 2020-10-20T11:51:05  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
263 2020-10-20T11:52:08  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2020-10-20T11:54:12  *** andreacab has quit IRC
265 2020-10-20T11:54:40  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2020-10-20T11:55:13  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
267 2020-10-20T11:55:14  *** andreacab has quit IRC
268 2020-10-20T11:57:19  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
269 2020-10-20T11:57:45  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2020-10-20T11:58:21  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2020-10-20T11:58:21  *** andreacab has quit IRC
272 2020-10-20T12:00:01  *** havenwood1 has quit IRC
273 2020-10-20T12:00:26  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
274 2020-10-20T12:00:39  *** wishbone has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2020-10-20T12:00:59  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-10-20T12:05:01  *** andreacab has quit IRC
277 2020-10-20T12:09:42  <vasild> jnewbery: I figured it out - had to move the check earlier - from run_test() to setup_nodes()
278 2020-10-20T12:19:50  *** brimstone1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2020-10-20T12:25:25  *** ctrlbreak has quit IRC
280 2020-10-20T12:25:48  *** ctrlbreak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
281 2020-10-20T12:29:41  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282 2020-10-20T12:49:38  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2020-10-20T12:51:49  *** Ga1aCt1Cz00__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
284 2020-10-20T12:51:55  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2020-10-20T12:51:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack closed pull request #20193: p2p: practicalswift would like review of 19972 (master...evict-inbound-onions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20193
286 2020-10-20T12:51:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
287 2020-10-20T12:55:27  *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has quit IRC
288 2020-10-20T13:09:50  *** mol_ has quit IRC
289 2020-10-20T13:17:41  *** andreacab has quit IRC
290 2020-10-20T13:24:12  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2020-10-20T13:28:36  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2020-10-20T13:38:44  *** promag has quit IRC
293 2020-10-20T13:38:57  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
294 2020-10-20T13:41:54  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2020-10-20T13:43:36  <jnewbery> vasild: good!
296 2020-10-20T13:45:36  *** mol has quit IRC
297 2020-10-20T13:46:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2020-10-20T13:46:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #20197: p2p: improve onion detection in AttemptToEvictConnection() (master...AttemptToEvictConnection-identify-onions-with-m_inbound_onion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20197
299 2020-10-20T13:46:13  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
300 2020-10-20T13:59:38  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: I saw that you have merged some PRs in the GUI repository. Are you going to open a PR on the main repository?
301 2020-10-20T14:24:45  <jonasschnelli> with the settings.json file: is there a way to disable loading a specific wallet that has been stored in settings.json?
302 2020-10-20T14:30:46  *** andreacab has quit IRC
303 2020-10-20T14:31:15  *** glozow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2020-10-20T14:33:27  *** davterra has quit IRC
305 2020-10-20T14:37:31  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
306 2020-10-20T14:38:13  <ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, if you run with -nowallet on command line it resets the list and takes precedence, and you can add other wallets after like -nowallet -wallet=mywallet
307 2020-10-20T14:40:22  <ryanofsky> also wallet is removed from settings if you unload it in the gui or call an rpc with load_on_startup=False
308 2020-10-20T14:40:45  *** mol_ has quit IRC
309 2020-10-20T14:41:00  <ryanofsky> and #20186 will avoid creating the wallet, if you are trying to avoid creating, not loading
310 2020-10-20T14:41:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20186 | wallet: Make -wallet setting not create wallets by ryanofsky · Pull Request #20186 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
311 2020-10-20T14:41:05  <jonasschnelli> thanks ryanofsky
312 2020-10-20T14:43:29  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: settings.json is only in conjunction with the GUI, right? RPC loadwallet will not make create that file?
313 2020-10-20T14:43:29  <ryanofsky> no problem. also you can run with -nosettings to ignore the whole file
314 2020-10-20T14:44:19  <ryanofsky> yes by default loadwallet doesn't modify settings unless you pass load_on_startup=true or load_on_startup=false
315 2020-10-20T14:45:36  <jonasschnelli> I guess the issue if someone creates a wallet with --wallet=mywallet in bitcoin.conf or via cli parameter, unloaded it and loads it again in the GUI (or with load_on_startup), restarts bitcoin with the same parameter will lead to a halt due to a duplicate -wallet parameter?
316 2020-10-20T14:45:50  <jonasschnelli> (the issue can be overlooked / edge-case)
317 2020-10-20T14:48:05  <ryanofsky> i think ideally duplicate wallet error would not be triggered by that, but it is an edge case
318 2020-10-20T14:50:45  <ryanofsky> there maybe be similar cases worth fixing. like if a bitcoin.conf specifies a wallet to load, and you unload it and reload it in the gui, that should not trigger any duplicate wallet error
319 2020-10-20T14:52:09  <ryanofsky> but in general the idea is for the gui to simply reload the same wallets you loaded last time, so you can stop using bitcoin.conf
320 2020-10-20T14:52:12  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2020-10-20T14:55:57  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: the reason why I look at that issue is that probably some users have specified --wallet(s) in bitcoin.conf (or CLI parameter) and will eventually run into the load/unload issue
322 2020-10-20T14:56:15  <jonasschnelli> They are potentially puzzled why the "duplicate error" pops up and core refuses to start
323 2020-10-20T14:56:36  <ryanofsky> right, i'm agreeing that should be fixed
324 2020-10-20T14:56:39  <jonatack> ryanofsky: i wonder if adding mention of -nowallet to -wallet would be helpful. like how -nosettings is documented in -settings.
325 2020-10-20T14:56:47  <jonasschnelli> it's more an upgrade issue than a "I'm new to 0.21" thing
326 2020-10-20T14:57:22  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: would it hurt to just de-duplicate those entries (ignore duplicates)?
327 2020-10-20T14:58:29  <ryanofsky> jonatack, could be depending on the use case. I thought -nosettings was useful to document for a sysadmin who doesn't wants a static configuration and doesn't want dynamic settings being used
328 2020-10-20T14:59:14  <ryanofsky> Use cases for -nowallet are more obscure as far as I know. We use them in the testing framework, and here we are talking about using it to work around a bug that should just be fixed
329 2020-10-20T14:59:30  <jonatack> ryanofsky: oh ok. the "no" idiom is known, but TIL you can reset the wallet list with -nowallet
330 2020-10-20T14:59:54  <ryanofsky> s/doesn't wants/just wants/ above
331 2020-10-20T15:00:02  *** brimstone1 has quit IRC
332 2020-10-20T15:00:45  <jonasschnelli> I also wasn't aware of the -nowallet reset in the parameter order jonatack
333 2020-10-20T15:00:45  <jnewbery> #startmeeting
334 2020-10-20T15:00:45  <lightningbot> Meeting started Tue Oct 20 15:00:45 2020 UTC.  The chair is jnewbery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
335 2020-10-20T15:00:45  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
336 2020-10-20T15:00:54  <jnewbery> #bitcoin-core-dev P2P 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
337 2020-10-20T15:01:00  <jnewbery> amiti fjahr jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55 elichai2
338 2020-10-20T15:01:02  <jonasschnelli> hi
339 2020-10-20T15:01:03  <jnewbery> hi folks!
340 2020-10-20T15:01:08  <gleb> Hi
341 2020-10-20T15:01:09  <fanquake> hi
342 2020-10-20T15:01:09  <ryanofsky> yeah -noXXX for a list setting clears the list. hopefully you never have to rely on this!
343 2020-10-20T15:01:10  <amiti> hi
344 2020-10-20T15:01:11  <sipa> hi
345 2020-10-20T15:01:12  <ariard> hi
346 2020-10-20T15:01:19  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
347 2020-10-20T15:01:22  <jonatack> hallo
348 2020-10-20T15:01:28  <sdaftuar> heya
349 2020-10-20T15:01:31  <ajonas> hi
350 2020-10-20T15:01:50  <jnewbery> first of all, congrats everyone for getting so many PRs reviewed and merged before feature freeze!
351 2020-10-20T15:01:53  <awesome_doge> hi
352 2020-10-20T15:02:16  <jnewbery> we got addrv2, transaction request overhaul, taproot and anchor connections all merged
353 2020-10-20T15:02:37  <jnewbery> Just one proposed topic today: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings#20-oct-2020
354 2020-10-20T15:02:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20 | JSON-RPC callback · Issue #20 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
355 2020-10-20T15:02:54  <jnewbery> Before we do that, does anyone have any updates or want to share what they're working on/prioritising?
356 2020-10-20T15:03:45  <jnewbery> ok, our single topic is:
357 2020-10-20T15:03:46  <jnewbery> Remove timestamps from addr messages? It seems like the timestamp is only used to leak information about our recent connectivity. It doesn't look like we use it to make decisions about who to connect to. (sdaftuar/jnewbery)
358 2020-10-20T15:03:57  <jnewbery> sdaftuar: do you want to explain?
359 2020-10-20T15:04:03  <sdaftuar> oy, i can try
360 2020-10-20T15:04:40  <sdaftuar> i guess the background here is around looking at how addrman works, and what information it might leak about our peers (and whether or not that is ok, i guess)
361 2020-10-20T15:04:51  <emzy> hi
362 2020-10-20T15:05:03  <sdaftuar> i was chatting with jnewbery about the interaction specifically with block-relay-only peers, where we really don't want to leak anything
363 2020-10-20T15:05:40  <sdaftuar> and one observation was that right now in master, we basically directly leak the time at which we were connected to a block-relay-only peer after we disconnect from that peer and then include the address in a getaddr response
364 2020-10-20T15:05:48  <gleb> It does indeed leak info, but I never thought about solving the issue in this fashion...
365 2020-10-20T15:05:59  <sdaftuar> we can fix that, but it led to wondering: what good does this time do anyone, anyway?
366 2020-10-20T15:06:24  <sipa> is it actually not used for anything?
367 2020-10-20T15:06:32  <sdaftuar> our own software seems to barely use those times: we use it to sometimes filter out responses to getaddr requests, and we use to sometimes to evict things from the new table
368 2020-10-20T15:06:33  <gleb> There is a check in IsTerrible
369 2020-10-20T15:06:39  <gleb> Seeing if it’s older than a month
370 2020-10-20T15:06:46  <ariard> the fact it's not used by core addrman doesn't mean it's not used by some other bitcoin clients to decide its peering
371 2020-10-20T15:06:50  <sdaftuar> but we do not use it for determining who to connect to, as far as i can tell.
372 2020-10-20T15:08:44  <gleb> From what I remember I think you are right, but those existing features are not nothing
373 2020-10-20T15:08:44  <jnewbery> using timestamps is already a well-known way of infering network topology: https://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/coinscope/coinscope.pdf
374 2020-10-20T15:08:46  <sdaftuar> ariard: agreed. but i thought it might be worth polling people about how much good these timestamps can do, as they are necessarily unverifiable data?
375 2020-10-20T15:08:56  <jonatack> CAddrMan::Good: "nTime is not updated here, to avoid leaking information about currently-connected peers."
376 2020-10-20T15:09:16  <sipa> sdaftuar: good question
377 2020-10-20T15:09:48  <sdaftuar> gleb: i imagine we could replace their use in those two places without that much trouble
378 2020-10-20T15:09:52  <gleb> I think the way we use them, an adversary can’t really manipulate, because the checks are very moderate
379 2020-10-20T15:10:05  <sdaftuar> eg by using nlasttry/nlastsuccess
380 2020-10-20T15:10:29  <gleb> even if someone bumps their own addrs too much, they don’t really become “better”
381 2020-10-20T15:10:43  <gleb> sdaftuar: and that won’t propagate through the network?
382 2020-10-20T15:10:54  <gleb> it will have effect only locally at every node
383 2020-10-20T15:11:02  <sdaftuar> gleb: given that we don't use them for much, it seems there is only downside to us by potentially telling our peers who we were connected to and at what time?
384 2020-10-20T15:12:16  <gleb> Telling that a given address we’re relaying is not one year old...
385 2020-10-20T15:12:36  <sdaftuar> we could still use nlastsuccess to filter out old addresses from our getaddr responses, i think?
386 2020-10-20T15:12:39  <ariard> sdaftuar: right,  unverifiable data doesn't mean it can be useful even if it's gentleman-style of enforcment
387 2020-10-20T15:12:59  <ariard> a lot of alternatives p2p stack doesn't sanitize their addrs with a feeler connection
388 2020-10-20T15:13:17  <gleb> and they can retell this fact to other peers without connecting by themselves. Just tell what we told
389 2020-10-20T15:14:03  <sdaftuar> interestingly, we don't update that time field when we successfully connect to a peer via a feeler connection, i believe.
390 2020-10-20T15:14:09  <gleb> I need to look better at the code. I’d be very happy to get rid of this stuff
391 2020-10-20T15:14:27  <sipa> i'll also have a look in more detail
392 2020-10-20T15:14:30  <jnewbery> ariard: tradeoff there seems to be between helping a [theoretical] alternative implementation make better decisions about who to connect to -vs- protecting our own privacy
393 2020-10-20T15:14:33  <sipa> it's very appealing
394 2020-10-20T15:14:58  *** promag has quit IRC
395 2020-10-20T15:15:02  <jnewbery> by default we should always lean towards protecting our own privacy, unless doing so would be detrimental to the network as a whole
396 2020-10-20T15:15:23  <ariard> jnewbery: I would favor protecting our own privacy, but as a good practice asking on the ml would be great, at least to warrant
397 2020-10-20T15:15:30  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
398 2020-10-20T15:15:38  <gleb> jnewbery: I suggest ariard thinks more whether time stamps can help light clients a lot comparing to feeler strategy
399 2020-10-20T15:16:16  <amiti> +1 I don't have a complete understanding of these timestamps, but when I've looked at them in the past I've come to similar conclusions where they aren't used for much since they are unreliable and are easy to accidentally leak information
400 2020-10-20T15:16:17  <jnewbery> ariard: +1. This would be a de facto change to the p2p protocol. Circulating it on the mailing list would be good manners, at least
401 2020-10-20T15:17:03  <gleb> They are unreliable, but they also can’t be exploited actively I think  (only leak info, passive exploit)
402 2020-10-20T15:17:39  <sdaftuar> gleb: whether they can be exploited depends on how people are using them. i agree our software seems to be designed so that this is just an information leak
403 2020-10-20T15:17:40  <jnewbery> I think another piece of (almost) useless data that we could stop sharing is the start_height in the version message, but that's maybe a different discussion
404 2020-10-20T15:18:04  <amiti> yeah, exactly, they can't be exploited because we write logic to not rely on it
405 2020-10-20T15:18:06  <ariard> Even assuming they're used by some lightclient p2p stack, inviting ecosystem-wise not relying on them due to their distrusted nature would be better
406 2020-10-20T15:18:44  <sipa> we can stop using the nTime field without caring about what others do... if we'd start setting them differently (all zero? just the current time? random within some window?) we may want to seek opinions on the ml
407 2020-10-20T15:19:02  *** andreacab has quit IRC
408 2020-10-20T15:19:12  <sdaftuar> agreed
409 2020-10-20T15:19:23  <sipa> i imagine we'd do those at different points in time anyway
410 2020-10-20T15:20:03  <gleb> Sipa: but Most of their use is already about setting them differently, it seems we mainly discussing dropping that :)
411 2020-10-20T15:20:12  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412 2020-10-20T15:20:33  <gleb> or, well, using them to filter out responses I guess. We sort of “promised” to use them?
413 2020-10-20T15:20:43  <gleb> whatever, i think we’re on the same page
414 2020-10-20T15:20:49  <ariard> just set them to zero, in case of randomness source breakup that's not a fingerprint for your node
415 2020-10-20T15:21:37  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
416 2020-10-20T15:21:43  <gleb> Setting them to 0 would break compatibility
417 2020-10-20T15:21:44  *** grafa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
418 2020-10-20T15:21:46  <sipa> ariard: if our RNG has issues, we have bigger problems
419 2020-10-20T15:22:03  <gleb> old nodes think that ntime < 10000000 is trash iirc
420 2020-10-20T15:22:12  <sipa> ariard: and setting them to 0 would actively hurt relay chances on current code
421 2020-10-20T15:22:48  <gleb> we probably should randomize them within a week window from now or so
422 2020-10-20T15:22:59  <ariard> good to know, do we have other compatibility bounds to care about beyond ntime < 10000000 ?
423 2020-10-20T15:23:07  <jnewbery> gleb: if time is < 100000000, we set it to some recent time: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/f5bd46a4cc6d395ce71ecb99852c1774235a249c/src/net_processing.cpp#L2573-L2574
424 2020-10-20T15:24:00  <gleb> Oh right, sorry, I’m on my phone
425 2020-10-20T15:24:09  <jnewbery> maybe we just set it to MAX_UINT32
426 2020-10-20T15:24:33  <sdaftuar> i have another related topic to mention while we're discussing addrman-- i opened a PR to fix some interactions between addrman and block-relay-only peers. it's a reversal from the direction i was leaning before about how this should work, so wanted to mention it in case anyone wanted to discuss
427 2020-10-20T15:25:02  *** andreacab has quit IRC
428 2020-10-20T15:25:05  <sdaftuar> cc amiti and jnewbery as this came up during a recent PR under review
429 2020-10-20T15:26:06  <jnewbery> #20187
430 2020-10-20T15:26:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20187 | Addrman: test-before-evict bugfix and improvements for block-relay-only peers by sdaftuar · Pull Request #20187 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
431 2020-10-20T15:26:58  <sdaftuar> the tl;dr is that after looking into how eviction works from the new and tried tables, i decided it all works better to make sure that our block-relay-only peers in fact get moved to the tried table
432 2020-10-20T15:27:19  <sdaftuar> which necessitates invoking addrman functions on those addresses and changing addrman state of course
433 2020-10-20T15:27:40  <jnewbery> the change in net_processing seems reasonable to me. I haven't looked at the changes in net.
434 2020-10-20T15:27:44  <sipa> right
435 2020-10-20T15:27:48  <sdaftuar> but lots of things to consider (particularly privacy issues that are hard to reason about) so if someone spots a problem i'd love to discuss
436 2020-10-20T15:28:17  <sdaftuar> one particular problem is if the timestamps we return in getaddr messages for those peers will stick out somehow!
437 2020-10-20T15:28:34  <sipa> it's a balance beteeen not updating addrman to minimize detectability of block-only connections, and updating it to make sure we keep good ones
438 2020-10-20T15:28:40  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2020-10-20T15:28:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #20198: Show name, format and if uses descriptors in bitcoin-wallet tool (master...2020/10/wallet_tool_sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20198
440 2020-10-20T15:28:40  <sdaftuar> yep
441 2020-10-20T15:28:41  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
442 2020-10-20T15:28:51  <amiti> the idea makes sense, I'll take a closer look at the code
443 2020-10-20T15:29:48  <sdaftuar> (that's all i've got)
444 2020-10-20T15:30:37  <jnewbery> While we're on the subject of addrman, it seems strange to me that it's owned by CConnMan. I think it makes sense to pull it out into a separate component that's owned by the node context object, so other components can access it directly.
445 2020-10-20T15:30:48  <sipa> sdaftuar: do you believe there are more issues than fixed by your PR?
446 2020-10-20T15:30:57  <jnewbery> Is there areason not to do that?
447 2020-10-20T15:31:15  <ariard> what other components need access to addrman ? or might need in the future?
448 2020-10-20T15:31:18  <sipa> jnewbery: whatever works
449 2020-10-20T15:31:26  <jnewbery> ariard: net_processing and rpc
450 2020-10-20T15:31:35  <gleb> No opinion on moving components around
451 2020-10-20T15:31:39  <sdaftuar> sipa: not at the moment, i dont' think.  the only other addrman-related thing i'm worrying about is addr relay i think
452 2020-10-20T15:31:39  <sipa> and net
453 2020-10-20T15:31:44  <sdaftuar> but that's a different type of issue
454 2020-10-20T15:32:13  <jnewbery> currently net_processing access addrman through some forwarding functions in cconnman
455 2020-10-20T15:32:50  <ariard> sounds good to move so
456 2020-10-20T15:33:33  <jnewbery> any other topics before we wrap up? Anyone have any review begs?
457 2020-10-20T15:34:16  <ariard> what outstanding p2p bugfixs/followups are required for current release ?
458 2020-10-20T15:34:29  <jonatack> I plan to circle back soon to finish reviewing #19858 which looks pretty close
459 2020-10-20T15:34:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19858 | Periodically make block-relay connections and sync headers by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19858 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
460 2020-10-20T15:34:48  *** promag has quit IRC
461 2020-10-20T15:34:59  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462 2020-10-20T15:35:01  <vasild> hi, I started looking into i2p support
463 2020-10-20T15:35:02  <sdaftuar> jonatack: thanks -- guessing it won't be merged until after we branch off the next release though
464 2020-10-20T15:35:04  <jnewbery> ariard: you can find current release issues/prs here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/45
465 2020-10-20T15:35:16  <sdaftuar> in case that affects your review priorities!
466 2020-10-20T15:35:42  <jnewbery> (I have one review beg: the backport of wtxid relay to 0.20 #19606)
467 2020-10-20T15:35:44  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19606 | Backport wtxid relay to v0.20 by jnewbery · Pull Request #19606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
468 2020-10-20T15:36:23  <jnewbery> ok, seems like that's all. Thanks folks. See you in two weeks
469 2020-10-20T15:36:25  <jonatack> vasild: nice! Oh, #20120 had 3 acks by vasild promag hebasto
470 2020-10-20T15:36:26  <jnewbery> #endmeeting
471 2020-10-20T15:36:26  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Tue Oct 20 15:36:26 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
472 2020-10-20T15:36:26  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-20-15.00.html
473 2020-10-20T15:36:26  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-20-15.00.txt
474 2020-10-20T15:36:26  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-20-15.00.log.html
475 2020-10-20T15:36:27  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
476 2020-10-20T15:37:08  <jonatack> (it's more net than p2p)
477 2020-10-20T15:37:12  <jnewbery> oh sorry vasild. I missed your message. Did you have more you wanted to share/discuss?
478 2020-10-20T15:37:22  <vasild> no :)
479 2020-10-20T15:37:41  <jnewbery> ok, I look forward to hearing more about it in another meeting then :)
480 2020-10-20T15:43:53  *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2020-10-20T15:52:14  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2020-10-20T15:57:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
483 2020-10-20T15:57:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #20199: Ignoring (but warn) on dublicate -wallet parameters (master...2020/10/de-duplicate-wallets) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20199
484 2020-10-20T15:57:11  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
485 2020-10-20T15:58:51  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
486 2020-10-20T16:03:40  *** andreacab has quit IRC
487 2020-10-20T16:25:41  *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
488 2020-10-20T16:26:01  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
489 2020-10-20T16:26:48  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
490 2020-10-20T16:26:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] adamjonas opened pull request #20200: doc: Remove breaking line of CODEOWNERS file (master...102020-fix-codeowners) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20200
491 2020-10-20T16:26:49  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
492 2020-10-20T16:29:00  *** mol has quit IRC
493 2020-10-20T16:30:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
494 2020-10-20T16:30:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #20201: build: pkg-config related cleanup (master...201020-pkg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20201
495 2020-10-20T16:30:14  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
496 2020-10-20T16:31:28  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
497 2020-10-20T16:31:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #20202: wallet: Make BDB support optional (master...opt-sqlite-bdb) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20202
498 2020-10-20T16:31:29  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
499 2020-10-20T16:31:58  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
500 2020-10-20T16:36:36  *** andreacab has quit IRC
501 2020-10-20T16:38:22  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502 2020-10-20T16:38:39  *** rabidus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
503 2020-10-20T16:42:49  <hebasto> jonasschnelli: around?
504 2020-10-20T16:48:15  *** afk11 has quit IRC
505 2020-10-20T17:12:58  *** ossifrage has quit IRC
506 2020-10-20T17:15:14  *** owowo has quit IRC
507 2020-10-20T17:19:33  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
508 2020-10-20T17:20:57  *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
509 2020-10-20T17:31:05  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
510 2020-10-20T17:31:37  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
511 2020-10-20T17:31:48  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512 2020-10-20T17:33:32  *** morcos has quit IRC
513 2020-10-20T17:33:46  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2020-10-20T17:37:30  *** andreacab has quit IRC
515 2020-10-20T17:38:09  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
516 2020-10-20T17:42:59  *** andreacab has quit IRC
517 2020-10-20T17:47:11  *** sr_gi has quit IRC
518 2020-10-20T17:47:49  *** sr_gi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
519 2020-10-20T17:55:10  <luke-jr> achow101: did a UUID of some sort get in the SQLite wallet, to replace the BDB unique id?
520 2020-10-20T17:55:41  <achow101> luke-jr: no. I think we determined it wasn't needed
521 2020-10-20T17:55:44  <luke-jr> but it is
522 2020-10-20T17:55:52  <luke-jr> ugh
523 2020-10-20T17:55:54  <achow101> the BDB unique id is only needed to avoid some caching problem
524 2020-10-20T17:55:59  <achow101> what is it needed for?
525 2020-10-20T17:56:18  <luke-jr> prune locks, at least; who knows what else in the future
526 2020-10-20T17:56:29  <achow101> how so?
527 2020-10-20T17:56:56  <luke-jr> to uniquely identify a wallet no matter where the user moves/renames it
528 2020-10-20T17:58:43  <achow101> it can be added in later
529 2020-10-20T17:58:49  <luke-jr> not really
530 2020-10-20T17:58:55  <luke-jr> backups made before the upgrade won't have it
531 2020-10-20T18:00:01  *** grafa has quit IRC
532 2020-10-20T18:03:21  <achow101> why do wallet files need to be uniquely identified?
533 2020-10-20T18:03:38  <achow101> I remember looking at this before but I can't find the commit
534 2020-10-20T18:06:12  <luke-jr> achow101: eg #19463
535 2020-10-20T18:06:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19463 | Prune locks by luke-jr · Pull Request #19463 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
536 2020-10-20T18:06:31  <luke-jr> another example would be backup reminders
537 2020-10-20T18:10:20  <achow101> i still don't see how not having a preexisting id is a problem. If you add the id to a wallet, and add the prune lock for that id, then we won't prune beyond the requirement for that wallet. when the backup is restored, sure a new id is generated, but we still haven't pruned too far
538 2020-10-20T18:10:21  *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2020-10-20T18:10:25  <achow101> it's just extra stuff in the db
540 2020-10-20T18:17:07  <luke-jr> and have a poor UX because we have the wallet twice in prune locks confusing the user
541 2020-10-20T18:17:24  <luke-jr> nevermind unknown future use cases
542 2020-10-20T18:19:30  <achow101> sure, but a unique wallet id should not be at the db level
543 2020-10-20T18:20:38  <sipa> having a warning for the user that two copies of the same wallets have been loaded seems moderately useful in any case
544 2020-10-20T18:20:57  <achow101> we could make the id deterministic based on active spkman
545 2020-10-20T18:21:21  <luke-jr> actually, right now users expect an error if they try to load two copies..
546 2020-10-20T18:21:36  <achow101> for legacy, use the current seed, or default key for the non-hd wallets as they still have default key. for descriptor, hash the active descriptors
547 2020-10-20T18:21:42  <sipa> luke-jr: i usually just find it annoying that i can't load them at the same time :)
548 2020-10-20T18:21:48  <sipa> but a warning seems useful
549 2020-10-20T18:22:14  <achow101> the error for loading duplicates is bec2020-10-21T05:57:58  *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev