💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251835356)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251835729)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251836246)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251836621)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251837028)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251837270)
Done

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2251837962)
I've added an additional test case.

🤔 stickies-v reviewed a pull request: "policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#pullrequestreview-3084739386)
Concept ACK

Protecting against DoS / bandwidth usage should be the primary concern of this policy. The calculations and rationales presented in this thread, mostly by @ajtowns (e.g. [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3095260286), [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3142444090)) make sense to me, and a 10x decrease seems like it's in the right ballpark.

Even though I don't think this policy should be used to artificially support m
...

💬 sipa commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#issuecomment-3151257960)
utACK c0642e558a02319ade33dc1014e7ae981663ea46

💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#issuecomment-3151283966)
Nice, ACK c0642e558a02319ade33dc1014e7ae981663ea46

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: never check tx rejections by txid":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33066#discussion_r2251868109)
Yep, we don't ever put txids in the reconsiderable filter unless the txid is the same as the wtxid. We don't put witness-stripped in there either (even if we do #32379, as that will put it in the normal RecentRejects filter)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941)

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "test: fix p2p_leak_tx.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33121#issuecomment-3151317434)
Concept ACK

💬 Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "p2p: never check tx rejections by txid":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33066#discussion_r2251897931)
I modified p2p_opportunistic_1p1c.py to remove the witness on a low-fee parent tx and it failed with TX_RECONSIDERABLE (as those checks are before the 3x CheckInputScripts that returns WITNESS_STRIPPED). I think my comment was a little confusing, also not sure this matters in practice?

💬 jsarenik commented on pull request "policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3151356742)
Approach ACK

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: never check tx rejections by txid":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33066#discussion_r2251927093)
Ohhhh I see. Yeah, I suppose a witness-stripped can end up there if it's also low feerate. And adding a witness can only make the feerate decrease, so any tx with the same txid would have the same problem 😅

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "test: add assertions to SRD max weight test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33058)

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "wallet: Add `exportwatchonlywallet` RPC to export a watchonly version of a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32489#issuecomment-3151407154)
For anyone who's interested, I'm hosting a review club meeting about this PR on Wednesday: https://bitcoincore.reviews/32489

📝 fjahr opened a pull request: "refactor, index: Remove member variables in coinstatsindex"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33134)
This picks up a review comment from #30469 which [suggested to remove the member variables in coinstatsindex](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#discussion_r2219983800) and replace them with local variables where needed.

This is a pure refactor and performance should not be impacted because there is no increase in disk reads or writes.

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "index: Fix coinstats overflow":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#discussion_r2251979669)
Addressed in #33134