💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660345204)
Yeah, it is to reduce the ability for peers to construct cases that just happen to be worst case for the exact search order they know we're going to try.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349106)
Done, named as `MAX_SIMPLE_ITERATIONS`.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349184)
I've added comments.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349260)
I have no idea! Added a comment that it was found empirically.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349319)
Done.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349373)
Added a comment to `Linearize` to reflect this.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1660349427)
Done.

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "WIP: Fix coinstatsindex overflow issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26426)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "WIP: Fix coinstatsindex overflow issue":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26426#issuecomment-2199292529)
Closing for now due to inactivity for 1.5 years. #https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26362 remains open and can be used for discussion. This change can be reopened or recreated as a new pull request.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: p2p: check that connecting to ourself leads to disconnect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30362#issuecomment-2199328998)
ACK 5d2fb14bafe4e80c0a482d99e5ebde07c477f000

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "scripted-diff: Use LogInfo/LogDebug over LogPrintf/LogPrint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29641#issuecomment-2199403598)
> I suggest [#29256 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29256#issuecomment-2197461775) instead.
>
> It may also make sense to finish consensus and work on the simplest possible consistent user-facing API and developer API before doing a mass migration.

I don't think the changes here conceptually conflict with any open pull request. There are discussions around the naming and functionality around `LogWarning` and `LogError`, but I don't think they are changed or touched in th
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "optimization: Switch CTxMemPool::CalculateDescendants from set to vector to reduce transaction hash calculations"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30325#pullrequestreview-2150632999)
Seems like a reasonable thing to do, but this conflicts with / is already done in #28676. See the "Select transactions for blocks based on chunk feerate" commit there which gets rid of this call.

I think our current policy is to avoid making refactoring changes that would need to be redone or removed in cluster mempool.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "Add "maxuploadtargettimeframe" to change the timeframe considered by "maxuploadtarget""
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30176)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Add "maxuploadtargettimeframe" to change the timeframe considered by "maxuploadtarget"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30176#issuecomment-2199441498)
Closing for now, per previous comment.

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: Improve stability for txorphan and mini_miner harnesses"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30306#pullrequestreview-2150663280)
utACK e009bf681c0e38a6451afa594ba3c7c8861f61c3

Didn't check stability, but using txid seems fine.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "kernel: remove mempool_persist":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30344#issuecomment-2199482117)
lgtm, iiuc you'd want #30141 merged before this one?

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: remove mempool_persist":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30344#issuecomment-2199500416)
Re https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30344#issuecomment-2199482117

> lgtm, iiuc you'd want https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30141 merged before this one?

Mmh, I don't think this was said anywhere? Looks like the two are not really related either.

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "Correct Error Code in OP_IF/OP_NOTIF Empty Stack Check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30359)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Correct Error Code in OP_IF/OP_NOTIF Empty Stack Check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30359#issuecomment-2199513724)
Closing for now. At a minimum for changes like these, a unit test will have to be added. Also, the existing tests will need to pass. You'll have to run `make check && ./test/functional/test_runner.py` locally (before opening a pull request).

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Stuck in Endless Pre-Syncing Headers Loop":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26391#issuecomment-2199514099)
Do we want to keep this open to address [this](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26391#issuecomment-1292366671) comment?:

> Perhaps time is better spent on better reporting to the user, in the form of targetted warnings in logs (or even failure to start) when there appears to be a long invalid high-PoW chain out there.

Otherwise I think we can probably close this as stale.