💬 janb84 commented on issue "Guix: build riscv64 master / v30rc1 fails":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33426#issuecomment-3307456826)
Going to close this issue, it was a memory exhaustion problem.

Seems like V30 needs just a little more memory to build than V29.x

```console
collect2: fatal error: ld terminated with signal 9 [Killed]
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [src/qt/CMakeFiles/bitcoin-gui.dir/build.make:201: bin/bitcoin-gui] Error 1
make[2]: *** Deleting file 'bin/bitcoin-gui'
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:1991: src/qt/CMakeFiles/bitcoin-gui.dir/all] Error 2
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
```

...

✅ janb84 closed an issue: "Guix: build riscv64 master / v30rc1 fails"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33426)

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "rpc: Always return per-wtxid entries in submitpackage tx-results":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33427#issuecomment-3307462465)
concept ACK

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2359339020)
Looks like this was me just flubbing with the conversion of `GetCountWithAncestors()` to `GetNumDescendants()` instead of `GetNumAncestors()`? I'll just make that switch for now, rather than try to re-write this code using `GetCluster()`, which I'd rather save for a future PR at this point.

I also don't want to introduce a behavior change here, but as an aside I was surprised that no test failed with this mistake, and when looking at the original PR to refresh my memory I found this comment
...

💬 glozow commented on issue "fuzz: Speed up mini_miner fuzz target?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32870#issuecomment-3307495980)
Unsure what the best course of action is, since the plan is to reimplement MiniMiner anyway after #28676. If there's a timeout/infinite loop then that's a bug we should fix for current wallet users. But if it's just a slow test, then I'd suggest leaving it as is and it will probably fix itself when mempool is more efficient at cluster calculation.

I haven't looked into the input itself (idk if @enirox001 or somebody wants to do it) but if the culprit is just too many potential outpoints then we
...

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Cluster mempool implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2359350996)
didnt you nuke GetNumAncestors?

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Receiving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966#issuecomment-3307502671)
> It would be nicer if it just toggled the flag; I don't think anyone would accidentally perform such an import - and the flag is immutable via `setwalletflag`.

@Sjors Did you mean the flag is "mutable" via `setwalletflag`?

I don't have anything against automatically toggling silent-payments flag when a silent payment descriptor is imported.
@josibake WDYT?

💬 sipa commented on pull request "p2p: Increase tx relay rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28592#issuecomment-3307523145)
ACK b81f37031c8f2ccad9346f1b65ee0f8083c44796

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "p2p: Increase tx relay rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27630#issuecomment-3307535613)
Followed up in #28592.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Receiving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966#issuecomment-3307550172)
@Eunovo when I call `setwalletflag` it fails, saying the flag is immutable. I'm fine with either solution:
1. Make it mutable; or
2. Set it when importing an sp descriptor

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "coins: warn on oversized `-dbcache`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#pullrequestreview-3239885117)
reACK 168360f4ae47cbfdb30a2cc4704435bc67e12f16

✅ zaidmstrr closed an issue: "Test interface_ipc.py fails with Duplicate ID error when libmultiprocess is installed system-wide"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33417)

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#pullrequestreview-3239910323)
Code Review ACK 66401148ddcba04c27751e39e53fc41e6deb5d14

I shutdown a long-running node at height 915249.

```
.rw------- 128M ismaelsadeeq 18 Sep 14:46 mempool.dat
```

Restarted the node on master 1444ed855f4 with:

```bash
build/bin/bitcoind -connect=0 -debug
```

After loading the mempool, `getmempoolinfo` returned:

```json
{
"loaded": true,
"size": 104944,
"bytes": 43254588,
"usage": 260130384,
"total_fee": 0.10523099,
"maxmempool":
...

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#issuecomment-3307658710)
`7f87cddd36...ba6689aa9e`: drop some unrelated changes and pick some suggestions

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359495317)
Done.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359496859)
Removed the parameter change altogether.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359498826)
Reverted to the original comment and its location.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359504773)
Could add `std::cerr.flush()`, but I think it is not necessary because [cerr is unbuffered](https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/cpp/difference-between-cerr-and-clog/).

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359513993)
Hmm, I am not sure either. Maybe it should be done like you say. Unrelated to this PR.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2359516805)
Removed any changes to those parameters.