📝 abishek003-tech opened a pull request: "mzumsande"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33594)
Title:
Avoid using invalidateblock to directly test reorg behavior
Summary:
This update replaces direct invalidateblock-based reorg simulations in functional tests with a proper fork-based reorg approach.
Using invalidateblock alone to trigger reorgs causes unrealistic behavior, such as:
Limited reorg depth (only up to 10 blocks re-entering the mempool)
Incorrect descendant chain validation (PreChecks not executed per reorg)
Divergent code path compared to real-world Bitcoin reorg
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33594)
Title:
Avoid using invalidateblock to directly test reorg behavior
Summary:
This update replaces direct invalidateblock-based reorg simulations in functional tests with a proper fork-based reorg approach.
Using invalidateblock alone to trigger reorgs causes unrealistic behavior, such as:
Limited reorg depth (only up to 10 blocks re-entering the mempool)
Incorrect descendant chain validation (PreChecks not executed per reorg)
Divergent code path compared to real-world Bitcoin reorg
...
✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "mzumsande"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33594)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33594)
👍 l0rinc approved a pull request: "build: Bump clang minimum supported version to 17"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33555#pullrequestreview-3320830812)
Code review ACK fa0fa0f70087d08fe5a54832b96799bd14293279
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33555#pullrequestreview-3320830812)
Code review ACK fa0fa0f70087d08fe5a54832b96799bd14293279
⚠️ jotapea opened an issue: "Decouple Datacarrier Size and Nulldata Output Limits"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595)
# DRAFT: PR #X Decouple Datacarrier Size and Nulldata Output Limits for Granular OP_RETURN Policy
Status: Draft | Target: Bitcoin Core v30.1 (Q4 2025) | Author: @jotapea
## Motivation
With Bitcoin Core v30, support for multiple OP_RETURN outputs has been introduced, allowing up to 100,000 bytes in total.
This change aligns with miner incentives to accept data storage use, while enhancing Bitcoin's "censorship resistance". This is social debate, and out of the scope of this PR.
However, v30'
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595)
# DRAFT: PR #X Decouple Datacarrier Size and Nulldata Output Limits for Granular OP_RETURN Policy
Status: Draft | Target: Bitcoin Core v30.1 (Q4 2025) | Author: @jotapea
## Motivation
With Bitcoin Core v30, support for multiple OP_RETURN outputs has been introduced, allowing up to 100,000 bytes in total.
This change aligns with miner incentives to accept data storage use, while enhancing Bitcoin's "censorship resistance". This is social debate, and out of the scope of this PR.
However, v30'
...
📝 Ashok-0167 opened a pull request: "Add warning and documentation for -bind with Tor hidden services (#33…"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596)
…458)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests th
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596)
…458)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests th
...
💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387847521)
concept NACK, I don't think this extra configuration complexity adds anything useful to the software or the network as a whole. Miners are already including transactions without restriction on size, which is the whole reason why #32406 was proposed, discussed, written, reviewed, and merged.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387847521)
concept NACK, I don't think this extra configuration complexity adds anything useful to the software or the network as a whole. Miners are already including transactions without restriction on size, which is the whole reason why #32406 was proposed, discussed, written, reviewed, and merged.
💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "coins: fix `cachedCoinsUsage` accounting in `CCoinsViewCache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2418231037)
If `inserted=false`, you've still moved from `coin`.
Is this expected behavior ?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2418231037)
If `inserted=false`, you've still moved from `coin`.
Is this expected behavior ?
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[30.x] Finalise v30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33559#issuecomment-3387858376)
I ran a full `-reindex` with v30.0 (d5e0077bef4cc4484242bb9a88a4840bc803c091) until current tip (`height=918366`) with default `dbcache` (=450 MB) and fully enabled script validation (`-assumevalid=0`): it finished successfully in **11 hours, 22 minutes**.
Post-merge ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33559#issuecomment-3387858376)
I ran a full `-reindex` with v30.0 (d5e0077bef4cc4484242bb9a88a4840bc803c091) until current tip (`height=918366`) with default `dbcache` (=450 MB) and fully enabled script validation (`-assumevalid=0`): it finished successfully in **11 hours, 22 minutes**.
Post-merge ACK
💬 jotapea commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387878201)
The "extra complexity" is actually a fix to improved configuration. The current aggregated solution reusing `datacarriersize` has all signs of a hack. And is not surprising, as in the original goal was to deprecate.
The new feature allowing multiple OP_RETURN outputs warrants having its own very (simple and straightforward) configuration. And the usefulness is explicit: more control, not less.
Miners can do whatever they want, from using Knots, to Libre Relay. But changing the defaults for the
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387878201)
The "extra complexity" is actually a fix to improved configuration. The current aggregated solution reusing `datacarriersize` has all signs of a hack. And is not surprising, as in the original goal was to deprecate.
The new feature allowing multiple OP_RETURN outputs warrants having its own very (simple and straightforward) configuration. And the usefulness is explicit: more control, not less.
Miners can do whatever they want, from using Knots, to Libre Relay. But changing the defaults for the
...
💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387885398)
I just don't understand the motivation. v30 users can set `-datacarriersize=83` to keep the previous policy.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387885398)
I just don't understand the motivation. v30 users can set `-datacarriersize=83` to keep the previous policy.
💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2418251935)
I took a stab at eliminating `-limitancestorsize` and `-limitdescendantsize`, emitting a warning if those command line options are used, and eliminating all usages of DEFAULT_ANCESTOR_SIZE and DEFAULT_DESCENDANT_SIZE in #33591.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2418251935)
I took a stab at eliminating `-limitancestorsize` and `-limitdescendantsize`, emitting a warning if those command line options are used, and eliminating all usages of DEFAULT_ANCESTOR_SIZE and DEFAULT_DESCENDANT_SIZE in #33591.
💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: fix `cachedCoinsUsage` accounting in `CCoinsViewCache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2418258249)
Yes. `coin` is an rvalue, so it is already moved out of the caller. `inserted` should always be true anyways.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2418258249)
Yes. `coin` is an rvalue, so it is already moved out of the caller. `inserted` should always be true anyways.
🤔 Yasararf reviewed a pull request: "Add warning and documentation for -bind with Tor hidden services (#33…"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596#pullrequestreview-3321049048)
Previously, users who attempted to use --bind in combination with Tor hidden services did not receive any warning or reference to secure configuration practices.
This led to misconfiguration risks, such as exposing sensitive endpoints or incorrectly binding interfaces.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596#pullrequestreview-3321049048)
Previously, users who attempted to use --bind in combination with Tor hidden services did not receive any warning or reference to secure configuration practices.
This led to misconfiguration risks, such as exposing sensitive endpoints or incorrectly binding interfaces.
🤔 Yasararf reviewed a pull request: "Add warning and documentation for -bind with Tor hidden services (#33…"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596#pullrequestreview-3321052229)
This PR adds comprehensive documentation for integrating Datadog logging within the application. The new content provides step-by-step instructions to enable Datadog logging, configuration examples, and best practices for monitoring application performance and logs.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33596#pullrequestreview-3321052229)
This PR adds comprehensive documentation for integrating Datadog logging within the application. The new content provides step-by-step instructions to enable Datadog logging, configuration examples, and best practices for monitoring application performance and logs.
💬 miked348 commented on issue "Witness scripts being abused to bypass datacarriersize limit (CVE-2023-50428)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187#issuecomment-3387977140)
Concept ACK – Restricting MAX_OP_RETURN_RELAY reinforces Bitcoin’s monetary purpose and protects blockspace.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187#issuecomment-3387977140)
Concept ACK – Restricting MAX_OP_RETURN_RELAY reinforces Bitcoin’s monetary purpose and protects blockspace.
💬 Dorex45 commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-3387986021)
@earonesty
That’s a valid perspective, and I agree that decentralization and censorship resistance are core to Bitcoin. My point is that restricting block size alone doesn’t necessarily strengthen those properties it just limits access and scalability. Sidechains like CoreDAO aren’t “ecosystems of tokens,” but extensions that maintain Bitcoin’s security assumptions while enabling additional functionality off-chain. This separation keeps Bitcoin lean as a settlement layer while allowing innovat
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-3387986021)
@earonesty
That’s a valid perspective, and I agree that decentralization and censorship resistance are core to Bitcoin. My point is that restricting block size alone doesn’t necessarily strengthen those properties it just limits access and scalability. Sidechains like CoreDAO aren’t “ecosystems of tokens,” but extensions that maintain Bitcoin’s security assumptions while enabling additional functionality off-chain. This separation keeps Bitcoin lean as a settlement layer while allowing innovat
...
💬 jotapea commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387998723)
The **motivation** is respect the consensus. `-datacarriersize=83` isn't even the default any more.
The **usefulness** is control of the number of inputs separated from the size per input. Having both be one is sloppy. This is a new feature, which should be configurable.
The new config would be simple, seen from v30.1:
For same policy as v30.0 / Libre Relay
```conf
datacarrier=1
datacarriersize=0
datacarrierlimit=0
```
Defaults proposed for v30.1 (same result as historical consensus)
```con
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3387998723)
The **motivation** is respect the consensus. `-datacarriersize=83` isn't even the default any more.
The **usefulness** is control of the number of inputs separated from the size per input. Having both be one is sloppy. This is a new feature, which should be configurable.
The new config would be simple, seen from v30.1:
For same policy as v30.0 / Libre Relay
```conf
datacarrier=1
datacarriersize=0
datacarrierlimit=0
```
Defaults proposed for v30.1 (same result as historical consensus)
```con
...
💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "node: change a tx-relay on/off flag to enum":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33567#discussion_r2418346583)
Probably should use class enums for new things?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33567#discussion_r2418346583)
Probably should use class enums for new things?
💬 GrayHatGuy commented on pull request "node: change a tx-relay on/off flag to enum":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33567#discussion_r2418418837)
Keep your pron outta my money
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33567#discussion_r2418418837)
Keep your pron outta my money
💬 GrayHatGuy commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3388173535)
This is a perfect paper trail for the litigious
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3388173535)
This is a perfect paper trail for the litigious