💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568005106)
> Looks like it is working, but not claiming a lot of space:
>
> [cirrus-ci.com/task/6656469207089152?logs=ci#L408](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6656469207089152?logs=ci#L408)
>
> ```
> Total reclaimed space: 949.4MB
> ```

What amount do you expect?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568008377)
I already wiped all servers, but I was expecting that about 50GB of zombie stuff is cleared:


```
# du -sh /var/lib/docker/overlay2/
53G /var/lib/docker/overlay2/

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568021295)
> Not sure what is going on. Seems there are unreachable zombie containers in the overlay2 directory. Let's try `podman` instead.

Maybe add:
```
docker volume prune --force
```
?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568026526)
I listed all imaged, volumes, containers, and networks and the list was empty, apart from 3 small image layers.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568100802)
(CI is green, but it will probably take 6 months to find out if podman is running out of storage space as well)

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "log: don't log total disk read time in ConnectTip bench":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27673#issuecomment-1568107647)
tACK bc862fad29

I was able to reproduce dropping the commit from this pull (and on master):

```log
2023-05-30T09:27:25Z loadblk thread start
validation.cpp:2839:5: runtime error: division by zero
2023-05-30T09:27:25Z [bench] - Load block from disk: 0.06ms [0.00s (infms/blk)]
2023-05-30T09:27:25Z [bench] - Connect total: 0.36ms [0.00s (0.36ms/blk)]
2023-05-30T09:27:25Z [bench] - Flush: 0.03ms [0.00s (0.03ms/blk)]
2023-05-30T09:27:25Z [bench] - Writing chainstate: 0.02ms [0.00s
...

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "--with-sanitizers=float-divide-by-zero crash with -debug=bench in Chainstate::ConnectTip"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27635)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "log: don't log total disk read time in ConnectTip bench"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27673)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568147747)
> (CI is green, but it will probably take 6 months to find out if podman is running out of storage space as well)

Could explicit logging of disk space usage help in the meanwhile?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568154781)
This is already done, see https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4965521926389760?logs=ci#L356

📝 MarcoFalke opened a pull request: "ci: Enable float-divide-by-zero check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27778)
Enable it, because

* It is enabled on OSS-Fuzz, so to be able to catch bugs earlier, enable it here as well.
* It makes sense to enable, because when a float is divided by zero, it may be a logic bug in our code, so it should be suppressed in the suppressions file.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568162128)
> This is already done, see [cirrus-ci.com/task/4965521926389760?logs=ci#L356](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4965521926389760?logs=ci#L356)

Right. I mean, no need to wait for 6 month. If numbers are the same after a week then this PR works as intended, no?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#issuecomment-1568163647)
Ok, I'll check back a week after merge.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "ci: Prune dangling images on RESTART_CI_DOCKER_BEFORE_RUN"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27777#pullrequestreview-1450590109)
ACK fa123077bc3f39aa0969d883e2d799a054cd4543

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Update mappings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#discussion_r1210077812)
Same for `#include <boost/multi_index/hashed_index.hpp> // for hashed_index_iterator` etc ... ?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Update mappings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#discussion_r1210080813)
Seems an implementation detail of boost/signal that should map to `boost/signals2/signal.hpp`?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Update mappings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#discussion_r1210091336)
Looking into the `boost/signals2/signal.hpp` and `boost/signals2/optional_last_value.hpp` headers, I'd say that the `boost/optional.hpp` header is an implementation details of the latter, not former.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Update mappings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#issuecomment-1568212984)
Forget my earlier comments. I think this is correct, or at least a good step in the right direction.

lgtm ACK b2634ad1ed884ff7cd32f00cb45075c100902763

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Update mappings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#issuecomment-1568216467)
> Forget my earlier comments.

Including https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27710#discussion_r1210077812?

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Fee estimation: avoid serving stale fee estimate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27622#discussion_r1210099908)
Another use case could be so that testers can purposefully load (very) old fee estimate files to populate `estimatesmartfee`? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27415#issuecomment-1531711091