💬 iBeizsley commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677913513)
> > That's one potential goal of a node runner, but not all node runners, and not the only goal.
> Citation needed.
>
> The default behavior of Bitcoin Core is to relay transactions
Yes, bad wording. The majority are non-listening. Point being that those whose primary goal is maximum relay of blocks and transactions would be listening to achieve that.
> Anyway, full-RBF is only relevant to nodes that relay. Even if your claim was true, it would be irrelevant to this discussion.
Full RBF is
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677913513)
> > That's one potential goal of a node runner, but not all node runners, and not the only goal.
> Citation needed.
>
> The default behavior of Bitcoin Core is to relay transactions
Yes, bad wording. The majority are non-listening. Point being that those whose primary goal is maximum relay of blocks and transactions would be listening to achieve that.
> Anyway, full-RBF is only relevant to nodes that relay. Even if your claim was true, it would be irrelevant to this discussion.
Full RBF is
...
💬 YellowRoseCx commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677914442)
> > You are mistaken. Think about this in terms of information: the purpose of a Bitcoin node is to widely distribute information in the form of transactions and blocks.
>
> That's one potential goal of a node runner, but not all node runners, and not the only goal.
>
> In fact, as far as I'm aware, all estimates point to an overwhelming majority of nodes _not_ relaying.
>
> Running a node is an absolute necessity to interact with Bitcoin without any trust or dependence on third parties. Runn
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677914442)
> > You are mistaken. Think about this in terms of information: the purpose of a Bitcoin node is to widely distribute information in the form of transactions and blocks.
>
> That's one potential goal of a node runner, but not all node runners, and not the only goal.
>
> In fact, as far as I'm aware, all estimates point to an overwhelming majority of nodes _not_ relaying.
>
> Running a node is an absolute necessity to interact with Bitcoin without any trust or dependence on third parties. Runn
...
💬 petertodd commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677969873)
> > The default behavior of Bitcoin Core is to relay transactions
>
> Yes, bad (incorrect) wording. The majority are (/appear to be) non-listening. Point being that those whose primary goal is maximum relay of blocks and transactions would be listening to achieve that.
You're arguing a logical fallacy here. You might as well argue that the vast majority of people don't even run nodes, so there's no reason for any node to distribute any transactions or blocks at all.
The fact is, nodes t
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1677969873)
> > The default behavior of Bitcoin Core is to relay transactions
>
> Yes, bad (incorrect) wording. The majority are (/appear to be) non-listening. Point being that those whose primary goal is maximum relay of blocks and transactions would be listening to achieve that.
You're arguing a logical fallacy here. You might as well argue that the vast majority of people don't even run nodes, so there's no reason for any node to distribute any transactions or blocks at all.
The fact is, nodes t
...
💬 mzumsande commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1677983427)
Are you stopping `bitcoind` and restarting it after 24h, or do you keep it running? If it's the former, are you sure that the correct wallet is loaded? If it's the latter, does an actual restart fix the problem?
> Sincerely I don't know I understood you correctly, but these were my steps: (...)
I think the question was that when you create the output and then use `setmocktime` to mock time to a timestamp to the future (instead of waiting for 24h), whether you see the same effect immediatel
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1677983427)
Are you stopping `bitcoind` and restarting it after 24h, or do you keep it running? If it's the former, are you sure that the correct wallet is loaded? If it's the latter, does an actual restart fix the problem?
> Sincerely I don't know I understood you correctly, but these were my steps: (...)
I think the question was that when you create the output and then use `setmocktime` to mock time to a timestamp to the future (instead of waiting for 24h), whether you see the same effect immediatel
...
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678003436)
> Are you stopping `bitcoind` and restarting it after 24h, or do you keep it running? If it's the former, are you sure that the correct wallet is loaded? If it's the latter, does an actual restart fix the problem?
>
> > Sincerely I don't know I understood you correctly, but these were my steps: (...)
>
> I think the question was that when you create the output and then use `setmocktime` to mock time to a timestamp to the future (instead of waiting for 24h), whether you see the same effect
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678003436)
> Are you stopping `bitcoind` and restarting it after 24h, or do you keep it running? If it's the former, are you sure that the correct wallet is loaded? If it's the latter, does an actual restart fix the problem?
>
> > Sincerely I don't know I understood you correctly, but these were my steps: (...)
>
> I think the question was that when you create the output and then use `setmocktime` to mock time to a timestamp to the future (instead of waiting for 24h), whether you see the same effect
...
💬 furszy commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678008787)
Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678008787)
Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678023853)
> Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
What you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678023853)
> Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
What you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
💬 furszy commented on pull request "test: display abrupt shutdown errors in console output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28253#issuecomment-1678026846)
> The CI uses the combine logs helper. Can you link to a CI output before and after?
Sure.
Before https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/runs/15887889073. No information provided.
After https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/runs/15886179713. The abrupt shutdown reason is printed.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28253#issuecomment-1678026846)
> The CI uses the combine logs helper. Can you link to a CI output before and after?
Sure.
Before https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/runs/15887889073. No information provided.
After https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/runs/15886179713. The abrupt shutdown reason is printed.
💬 furszy commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678030138)
> > Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
>
> What do you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
np. The `bitcoin-cli getbestblockhash` output.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678030138)
> > Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
>
> What do you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
np. The `bitcoin-cli getbestblockhash` output.
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033449)
>
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
<img width="662" alt="image" src="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/assets/3801362/041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72">
It remains to try again tomorrow.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033449)
>
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
<img width="662" alt="image" src="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/assets/3801362/041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72">
It remains to try again tomorrow.
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033600)
> Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
>
> <img alt="image" width="662" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3801362/260568373-041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72.png">
> It remains to try again tomorrow.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: 2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6
image
It remains to try again tomorrow.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033600)
> Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
>
> <img alt="image" width="662" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3801362/260568373-041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72.png">
> It remains to try again tomorrow.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: 2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6
image
It remains to try again tomorrow.
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033912)
> Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
>
> <img alt="image" width="662" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3801362/260568373-041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72.png">
> It remains to try again tomorrow.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: 2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6
image
It remains to try again tomorrow.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678033912)
> Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
>
> <img alt="image" width="662" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3801362/260568373-041a0f42-2cde-4b31-9c92-475c88946e72.png">
> It remains to try again tomorrow.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: 2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6
image
It remains to try again tomorrow.
💬 samyan commented on issue "Regtest mode loses unspents after day":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678035427)
> > > Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
> >
> >
> > What do you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
>
> np. The `bitcoin-cli getbestblockhash` output.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
It remains to try again tomorrow.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28262#issuecomment-1678035427)
> > > Just in case, please also print the current tip hash vs tomorrow's tip hash.
> >
> >
> > What do you mean with "tip"? Sorry, i'm a bit new to some things. :)
>
> np. The `bitcoin-cli getbestblockhash` output.
Thank you for clarify. So, today is: **2432724b29f73abdb2fc345db5e47a19d0ed286f7b7b85ad3485e2a53764f9b6**
It remains to try again tomorrow.
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Implement BIP352":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28122#discussion_r1293963387)
https://github.com/achow101/bitcoin/commit/57d72b52ca5a442982907cb09c8b26e1ab5e9d59 can be squashed in here to remove the `Recipient` class.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28122#discussion_r1293963387)
https://github.com/achow101/bitcoin/commit/57d72b52ca5a442982907cb09c8b26e1ab5e9d59 can be squashed in here to remove the `Recipient` class.
💬 Daniel600 commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1678052992)
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 10:27:10PM -0700, Antoine Riard wrote: Aiming to roll the ball forward I do have few technical questions for the users running zero-conf in an economic fashion: - do you have already deployed “fire cut” thresholds if more than X of your incoming on-chain transaction traffic is double-spend ? - would you consider batch CPFP of incoming zero-conf transaction as enabled by package-relay to deter double-spend ? - have you privacy-preserving cryptographic proofs (see the [`t
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1678052992)
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 10:27:10PM -0700, Antoine Riard wrote: Aiming to roll the ball forward I do have few technical questions for the users running zero-conf in an economic fashion: - do you have already deployed “fire cut” thresholds if more than X of your incoming on-chain transaction traffic is double-spend ? - would you consider batch CPFP of incoming zero-conf transaction as enabled by package-relay to deter double-spend ? - have you privacy-preserving cryptographic proofs (see the [`t
...
👍 murchandamus approved a pull request: "fuzz: improve `coinselection`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#pullrequestreview-1577634359)
Please lower the minimum target, otherwise 1942ea0e44c8b4143c9d97f23ff31dc9a6f64a56 looks ready to me. Nits optional of course. :)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#pullrequestreview-1577634359)
Please lower the minimum target, otherwise 1942ea0e44c8b4143c9d97f23ff31dc9a6f64a56 looks ready to me. Nits optional of course. :)
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293959610)
Nit: The “UTXO set” refers to the global state of the Bitcoin blockchain. A wallet’s available coins are its _UTXO pool_.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293959610)
Nit: The “UTXO set” refers to the global state of the Bitcoin blockchain. A wallet’s available coins are its _UTXO pool_.
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293962878)
Nit: Maybe call this `manual_inputs`.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293962878)
Nit: Maybe call this `manual_inputs`.
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293962271)
Nit:
```suggestion
std::set<std::shared_ptr<COutput>> utxo_pool;
for (const auto& utxo : utxos) {
utxo_pool.insert(std::make_shared<COutput>(utxo));
}
result.AddInputs(utxo_pool, subtract_fee_outputs);
```
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293962271)
Nit:
```suggestion
std::set<std::shared_ptr<COutput>> utxo_pool;
for (const auto& utxo : utxos) {
utxo_pool.insert(std::make_shared<COutput>(utxo));
}
result.AddInputs(utxo_pool, subtract_fee_outputs);
```
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293965983)
While we don’t broadcast transactions with outputs of that amount (except OP_RETURN maybe), if it doesn’t break anywhere, a target of 1 ṩ should maybe be legal for coin selection?
IIRC, Bitcoin Core permits 294 ṩ for P2WPKH outputs, so it should at least not be bigger than that.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293965983)
While we don’t broadcast transactions with outputs of that amount (except OP_RETURN maybe), if it doesn’t break anywhere, a target of 1 ṩ should maybe be legal for coin selection?
IIRC, Bitcoin Core permits 294 ṩ for P2WPKH outputs, so it should at least not be bigger than that.