🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: reduce runtime of p2p_opportunistic_1p1c.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33048)

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: fix wrong assert of current_tip == m_best_block_index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32878#issuecomment-3144915011)
> > > Hi @furszy , sorry for the delay, I've picked your commit of the test, which I missed earlier.
> >
> >
> > No problem. This needs a rebase.
>
> Hi @furszy , seems the test causes some data race, would be great if you could update it. I tried to fix it but I'm not familiar with the index logic.

It seems thread-related. Wait for the background thread to finish before the test ends: https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/commit/30e0b2929da53a1519e282504720fac43b180ea0 (same code, j
...

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "test: spurious failure in p2p_leak.py --v1transport":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33090#issuecomment-3144942332)
FYI the failing test is `p2p_leak_tx.py` (not `p2p_leak.py` as in title).

💬 darosior commented on pull request "policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3144947599)
A substantial portion of Bitcoin transactors and miners are already using the value which this PR sets as default. Over the past month we've seen a non-trivial amount of sub-1sat/vb transactions. As an illustration of this, in the past day of block more than 23% of transactions (!!) used a feerate lower than 1sat/vb. That one quarter of the average block's content is not being relayed by default Bitcoin Core has a significant impact on block propagation, due to the additional time spent validati
...

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#pullrequestreview-3078998320)
Code-review ACK 72c5f0321e90b324d125352a8ff720479af0382b

Only with some nitty nits / follow-up to the follow-up ideas :)

💬 theStack commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2247830247)
nit
```suggestion
weight of unique transactions must not exceed 404,000 WU multiplied by the number of peers.
```

💬 theStack commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2247899372)
comment nit/question: I think this scenario could only ever happen if the per-peer memory usage limit was set smaller than `MAX_STANDARD_TX_WEIGHT` (which would obviously be a bad idea), right? Otherwise `AddTx` would return early for such txs and doesn't reach `LimitOrphans`.

💬 theStack commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2247858413)
nit
```suggestion
if (m_reconsiderable_wtxids.contains(wtxid)) continue;
```

💬 theStack commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248258958)
Might be nice to set `-maxorphantx` in one functional test to ensure it doesn't error.

💬 theStack commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2247915200)
```suggestion
// We must now be within limits, otherwise LimitOrphans should have continued further.
```

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: disable builtin rules and suffixes.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33045#issuecomment-3144960961)
Guix Build:
```bash
3e4284b29a80131af5c9d6343a02cf5a2831187e7172a1a6ad7f23d1c80dc9c0 guix-build-dc52d2daa4bc/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
8e0f592bbc024e6bb47b330a356433353e1cf347d5e00c19120e64426bc909bc guix-build-dc52d2daa4bc/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-dc52d2daa4bc-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
2de2c50b3a98e5dbf9651e49aa3886203eb87ad23327b1bc062c3bb5aa628520 guix-build-dc52d2daa4bc/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-dc52d2daa4bc-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
e08b0025054c9ea5
...

💬 glozow commented on pull request "policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3144964472)
Rebased for #31385

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248271386)
Yes exactly!

📝 D33r-Gee opened a pull request: "Interfaces: Expose UTXO Snapshot Loading and Add Progress Notifications"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33117)
# Add UTXO Snapshot Loading Interface and Progress Notifications

This PR implements a complete interface for loading UTXO snapshots through the GUI, including progress notifications to provide user feedback during the loading process.

---

## Changes

### Commit 1: `interfaces: expose UTXO snapshot loading in node interface`

- Added a new virtual method `loadSnapshot` to the node interface for loading UTXO snapshots.
- Updated the implementation in `interfaces.cpp` to activate the
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "init: [gui] Avoid UB/crash in InitAndLoadChainstate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32987#discussion_r2248288321)
The new test fails [OpenBSD](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin-core-nightly/actions/runs/16665947528/job/47172219749), [NetBSD](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin-core-nightly/actions/runs/16665951490/job/47172247495) and [OmniOS](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin-core-nightly/actions/runs/16665947542/job/47172219930):
```
199/274 - feature_reindex_init.py failed, Duration: 2 s

stdout:
2025-08-01T05:00:55.735205Z TestFramework (INFO): PRNG seed is: 3861405245096017501
2025-08-01T05:00:5
...

💬 danielabrozzoni commented on pull request "refactor: Header sync optimisations & simplifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32740#issuecomment-3144999375)
After some thinking, I decided to drop the first commit, and let ProcessNextHeaders take the headers argument and return it, instead of using it as a I/O argument. I tried to write a benchmark to measure how much using the vector as I/O argument would optimize the code, but it convinced me that the new interface would be too hard to work with, as reviewers pointed out. While it might still be a performance improvement, I'm not sure if it's really worth it.

For anyone interested, here's my att
...

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248319433)
added

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248318653)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248319793)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2248320957)
already fixed I think