💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "test: create deterministic addrman in the functional tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29007#discussion_r1488218367)
i had the same suggestion independently (we have functional tests that doesn't use regtest but testnet)

💬 theuni commented on pull request "bitcoin-config.h includes cleanup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29404#issuecomment-1942165950)
@TheCharlatan Sure, agreed it's better than nothing. Not quite self-contained, but given that a few of us have independently arrived at what the correct diff should be, it's easy to tell if it's correct.

Will take that commit.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Add `createwalletdescriptor` and `gethdkeys` RPCs for adding new automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130#discussion_r1488424495)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Add `createwalletdescriptor` and `gethdkeys` RPCs for adding new automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130#discussion_r1488424589)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Add `createwalletdescriptor` and `gethdkeys` RPCs for adding new automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130#discussion_r1488424666)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Add `createwalletdescriptor` and `gethdkeys` RPCs for adding new automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130#issuecomment-1942188367)
Rebased for silent merge conflict.

👍 jarolrod approved a pull request: "Update translation source file for v27.0 string freeze"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/793#pullrequestreview-1878773475)
ACK 3d1bb1a122a037e966c2fb2e2113f0440edb8d93

Have zero-diff with this pr

👋 furszy's pull request is ready for review: "wallet: optimize migration process, batch db transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28574)

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "wallet: optimize migration process, batch db transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28574#pullrequestreview-1878791279)
> Starting to review, if you get a chance can you rebase this so that it's only the relevant outstanding commits?

Done. Rebased and reworked part of it.
I still need to accommodate some code and improve the commit descriptions. But, at least the changes are reviewable now.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#pullrequestreview-1878798243)
The last batching changes might help but.. it smells like you are facing another issue apart from those.

📝 hernanmarino opened a pull request: "test: add missing tests for Assumeutxo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29428)
The objective of this PR is to add some tests to the assumeUTXO logic.

The reason it is marked as Draft is because I am planning to add more (related) tests in the following days, but each commit you see in this PR CAN be reviewed now.

(If the approach of grouping related test in a single PR is undesirable, let me know and I'll split them in independent PRs )

The first test (86037415dd83da34d829f2f6bfb8dcbe08968180 as of now ) checks that snapshots with less accumulated work than the no
...

🚀 hebasto merged a pull request: "Update translation source file for v27.0 string freeze"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/793)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1942447314)
Not sure how to create a flame-graph, since it takes too long. But it may be eating time in `fdatasync` in

```
#9 0x0000559cb227c624 in wallet::SQLiteBatch::TxnCommit (this=0x7f5b24178fc0) at wallet/sqlite.cpp:668
#10 0x0000559cb21cff66 in wallet::DescriptorScriptPubKeyMan::TopUp (this=0x7f5b24178970, size=<optimized out>) at wallet/scriptpubkeyman.cpp:2148
#11 0x0000559cb21cb6d3 in wallet::LegacyScriptPubKeyMan::MigrateToDescriptor (this=0x7f5b24ee3900) at wallet/scriptpubkeyman.cpp:1925
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1942457440)
@maflcko Can you provide any more details about the wallet? The output of `getwalletinfo` would be helpful.

💬 hernanmarino commented on pull request "Update translation source file for v27.0 string freeze":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/793#issuecomment-1942479877)
I'm a little late but, in order to collaborate with this in the future what exactly should I be diffing ? between what branches/ files ? Thanks

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1942482242)
It is just a normal wallet:

```
{
"walletname": "-1707752467.legacy.bak-1707848638.legacy.bak-1707849652.legacy.bak-1707855504.legacy.bak",
"walletversion": 60000,
"format": "bdb",
"balance": 1.26999586,
"unconfirmed_balance": 0.00000000,
"immature_balance": 0.00000000,
"txcount": 661,
"keypoololdest": 1515426721,
"keypoolsize": 999,
"unlocked_until": 0,
"paytxfee": 0.00000000,
"private_keys_enabled": true,
"avoid_reuse": false,
"scanning": false,

...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1942484980)
How long does it take to migrate if you just let it complete?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1942542460)
Ok, I can try that. I wonder if anyone else can try the HDD+BDB combo to double check. Or if really no one else has a HDD+BDB for testing, it can be declared unsupported?

⚠️ 124maa opened an issue: "I don't think we should add a lock icon or something like that; there are significant benefits of having encrypted connections on a large scale, but users in general shouldn't assume that their specific connections are more secure for their specific purposes when they're v2."
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/794)
I don't think we should add a lock icon or something like that; there are significant benefits of having encrypted connections on a large scale, but users in general shouldn't assume that their specific connections are more secure for their specific purposes when they're v2.

_Originally posted by @sipa in https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/754#issuecomment-1713750890_

✅ 124maa closed an issue: "I don't think we should add a lock icon or something like that; there are significant benefits of having encrypted connections on a large scale, but users in general shouldn't assume that their specific connections are more secure for their specific purposes when they're v2."
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/794)