💬 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

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1725185420)
woops, fixed now

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1724970034)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1725375345)
added tests for orphans with rejected parents

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1724970656)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1725358054)
It makes them potentially larger transactions?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1725187075)
> womp womp

Can you be a bit more specific :joy:

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1725359052)
done