💬 fjahr commented on pull request "assumeutxo: Add dumptxoutset height param, remove shell scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29553#discussion_r1725892812)
I did some light testing of this and didn't see a negative performance impact. Actually the three times I ran with this change were slightly faster on average than with the current code here. But there was also quite a bit of volatility so that might have been pure luck. It doesn't look like it slows things down though, at least not on my machine.

I have left it out for now but can add it. I am curious what you mean by having it as an RPC option. This seems like something that we should just
...

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "assumeutxo: Add dumptxoutset height param, remove shell scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29553#issuecomment-2303159630)
Improved comments based on suggestions by @ryanofsky , thanks a lot!

💬 alfonsoromanz commented on pull request "test: assumeutxo: add missing tests in wallet_assumeutxo.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30455#discussion_r1725944346)
Thanks a lot @fjahr! Do you think that restoring a backup created in height `399` (scenario 3) would be enough for the purpose of this test?

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "test: assumeutxo: add missing tests in wallet_assumeutxo.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30455#discussion_r1725949003)
Yeah, I think that's enough for now. I am not convinced the other cases would cover additional interesting code paths but if I'm wrong the test can always be expanded later.

💬 gmaxwell commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2303324108)
It might be possible to conceal from a traffic analysis perspective what if anything was requested using padding.

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "fix: handle invalid `-rpcbind` port earlier":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30679#discussion_r1725991010)
Thanks, good suggestion. Makes things cleaner. Added.
Was also thinking about updating `ParseUint16()` to `ToIntegral()`, but that could be left for a follow-up, since we would also want to ensure adequate tests for `-port` and `-rpcport` with that update.

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "Fix maybe-uninitialized warning in IsSpentKey"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30691#pullrequestreview-2252525909)
ACK 17707db939cb09a16c002d226152e71fce9289f2

Thanks.

Looks like it's similar to what was seen in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30621#pullrequestreview-2234159075

Built on the previous commit (bc87ad98543299e1990ee1994d0653df3ac70093) and saw the warning.
Built on 17707db939cb09a16c002d226152e71fce9289f2 and did not see the warning.

Debian 12.6
gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: [refactor] Use m_rng directly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30571#issuecomment-2303868215)
Force pushed to fix another (years old) bug in the first commit

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: block checksum mismatch on Linux ext4 SATA SSDs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30692#issuecomment-2303899517)
> This looks like a LevelDB corruption inside the txindex index.

Are you sure, to me the error message reads `Error reading from database: Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: block checksum mismatch: $DATADIR/chainstate/873236.ldb`, whereas a index corruption should happen in `$DATADIR/indexes/`, according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/files.md#data-directory-layout, no?

> Btrfs, which doesn't work very well with key-value databases, I've found.

Are there any observ
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: block checksum mismatch on Linux ext4 SATA SSDs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30692#issuecomment-2303908456)
Otherwise, this is my reply template, which may or may not help here:

Bitcoin Core makes heavy use of CPU, RAM and storage IO. Hardware defects might only become visible when running Bitcoin Core. You might want to check your hardware for defects.

* Use software such as memtest86 to check your RAM.
* Use software such as linpack or Prime95 to check the CPU behaviour under load.
* Use software such as smartctl or CrystalDiskInfo to test your storage device use.

Source: https://bitcoin.
...

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#issuecomment-2303916729)
> I do agree with @Pantamis in [#24539 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#issuecomment-1320276112) that having it take 3x the space of **TxIndex** seems unfortunate, would prefer it used `CDiskTxPos` for the values. Edit: Would require disallowing pruning again.

To make the index more efficient we could replace the indexed outpoint with an 8 byte value `{block height|tx pos|output index}` and use the block height where the tx is spent instead of the full spending tx id,
...

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726455725)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726456027)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726456158)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726456332)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726456688)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726457244)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726457390)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726459734)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#discussion_r1726460114)
done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/commits/20b259332ff1d2e6ca6b291ffeda00b51497bbed