💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: show reindex progress in `ImportBlocks`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33353#discussion_r2360199070)
It's just an approximation - or do you think `Reindexing block file blk%05u.dat (5/123)...` would be clearer? We have progress in blocks as well, they're all just approximations...

💬 Raimo33 commented on pull request "log: show reindex progress in `ImportBlocks`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33353#discussion_r2360208827)
i think percentage is fine. it just means % of blocks instead of % of time

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "depends: Boost 1.89.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33428)
Update [Boost to 1.89.0](https://www.boost.org/releases/1.89.0/) in depends.

📝 marcofleon opened a pull request: "fuzz: reduce iterations in slow targets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33429)
This PR builds on top of the first two commits of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33425 to see if there's a speed up of the fuzz with MSan CI job.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#discussion_r2359472683)


```Suggestion
// The level must match the level the Cluster occurs in (call only valid with non-empty cluster).
```

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#discussion_r2359625033)
a940e46bb06cf40f65772516d67f78cbd87c6b52

noting we aren't tracking BlockBuilderImpl memory usage which only has growth in `m_excluded_clusters`

(N.B. I don't think we need ordered set for m_excluded_clusters)

👍 instagibbs approved a pull request: "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#pullrequestreview-3239814693)
ACK 66401148ddcba04c27751e39e53fc41e6deb5d14

Did not validate the numbers, non-blocking comments only

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#discussion_r2360237618)
66401148ddcba04c27751e39e53fc41e6deb5d14

micro-nit: couldn't figure out what `tot` meant for a second... "to t.... size?"
```Suggestion
DepGraphIndex total_size = max_size;
```

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#discussion_r2360179765)
89b7997e7414074da3b0a35a17d86a2dfe24f378

For these functions(and the later singleton ones) can we `Assume(graph_idx >= 0)`

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#discussion_r2359361516)
fdcb5f17bd100eb2c1765c13bbb8367d03fc7ea5

micro-nit for readability

```Suggestion
MakeAcceptable(*cluster, level);
```

💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: reduce iterations in slow targets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33429#issuecomment-3308577557)
There should be no loss of coverage when running on the inputs in qa-assets.

For `tx_pool_standard` I saw a speed up from 1068 to 720 seconds with this change. I think the loop in `initialize_tx_pool` is still slowing it down? I would need to look into some more, but I left that as is for now.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Update libmultiprocess subtree to fix intermittent mptest hang":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33412#issuecomment-3308650255)
ACK c49a43591f88dc199cc04e76f3cfcb7ba136f1a6

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2360439278)
Fixed name

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2360439282)
No problem, I put them back to the beginning

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2360439251)
I think this is trivial to review.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2360439503)
This seemed like the time to simplify these, but I don't mind, reverted.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2360440096)
I did this deliberately, but thinking a bit more I think we can make it work. Pushed something similar, let me know what you think.

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "p2p: Increase tx relay rate"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28592#pullrequestreview-3241205204)
utACK b81f37031c8f2ccad9346f1b65ee0f8083c44796. A value lower than 14 makes more sense to me, but 14 is an improvement on today's 7.

[Mainnet.observer](https://mainnet.observer/charts/transactions-per-day/) has historical statistics that can help guide our decision. Back when the 7 tx/s was picked, there was around 2.3 tx/s (when averaged over days). In this regard, doubling the default now that there is around 4.6 tx/s makes sense. However i think a lower value than 14 tx/s would be more ap
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "[27.x] Backports":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33416#issuecomment-3308904174)
Should also backport #31407

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "index: Fix missing case in the comment in NextSyncBlock()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32875#discussion_r2360633853)
I still think this should need a test as well, otherwise it just seems like a random change - especially in a PR that claims to change a comment only