💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "sync: improve CCoinsViewCache ReallocateCache - 2nd try":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30370#issuecomment-2365336998)
> Can you explain what you mean by this

I expanded on it in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30370#discussion_r1753749012.

My understanding is that `ReallocateCache` was introduced to save memory when shrinking the map after evictions, and this PR prohibits shrinking and reallocates the same capacity we were just trying to get rid of. If I'm mistaken here, I'd appreciate and explanation for why we can't solve it in a simpler way - e.g. by getting rid of `ReallocateCache` instead or
...

💬 KristijanSajenko commented on pull request "sync: improve CCoinsViewCache ReallocateCache - 2nd try":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30370#issuecomment-2365353646)
Thy

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Minar"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30944)

💬 melvincarvalho commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2365976866)
Sorry if this is the wrong spot for feedback. Post-merge, Testnet4 seems solid overall. One issue: difficulty appears to be rising exponentially, likely due to someone spoofing timestamps and pushing in 6 blocks every 20 minutes. I could be off here, but if difficulty keeps spiking, mining might become impractical, making reorgs easier. A possible fix: setting up a pool that builds on genuine 20-minute blocks (not spoofed ones), and having some miners point their hashpower to it.

💬 David79-bot commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2366210368)
Hi

📝 tsnob opened a pull request: "doc: fix broken link to release"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945)
Description:
While checking the previous releases, I figure out that the link to release 0.10.0 is broken.
The link is updated now with the correct address.

No additional test is needed because there was no code change

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: fix broken link to release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945#discussion_r1770365385)
Shouldn't this pont to `https://bitcoin.org/bin/insecure/bitcoin-core-0.10.0` instead?

Please fix the rest of them as well with a scripted diff:
```bash
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
sed -i --regexp-extended 's#(https://bitcoin\.org/bin/)([.0-9]+)#\1insecure/bitcoin-core-\2#g' ./doc/release-notes/*.md
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
```

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "rpc: show P2(W)SH redeemScript in getrawtransaction #27637"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27638)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: show P2(W)SH redeemScript in getrawtransaction #27637":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27638#issuecomment-2366451640)
Closing for now due to inactivity. You can leave a comment below to have this reopened. Also, a new pull request can be opened.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939#issuecomment-2366495985)
What are the exact steps to reproduce. Including the start of the server. Without full and exact steps to reproduce, there is nothing that can be done here.

💬 tsnob commented on pull request "doc: fix broken link to release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945#discussion_r1770495990)
> Shouldn't this pont to `https://bitcoin.org/bin/insecure/bitcoin-core-0.10.0` instead?
>
> Please fix the rest of them as well with a scripted diff:
>
> ```shell
> -BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
> sed -i --regexp-extended 's#(https://bitcoin\.org/bin/)([.0-9]+)#\1insecure/bitcoin-core-\2#g' ./doc/release-notes/*.md
> -END VERIFY SCRIPT-
> ```

Hi @l0rinc, thanks for your suggestion. however I think the directory you provided (https://bitcoin.org/bin/insecure/) only includes limited releases
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "doc: fix broken link to release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945#issuecomment-2366733545)
Thanks. However we generally don't modify historical release notes.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "doc: fix broken link to release"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: fix broken link to release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30945#discussion_r1770527410)
https://bitcoin.org/bin/insecure/bitcoin-core-0.10.0 contains everything that https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.10.0 contains - and the rest of the <0.10.0 release links are also wrong and should be fixed.

Please squash the commits (we need a clean history) and fix all of them via a single [scripted-diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#scripted-diffs) commit.

Approach NACK

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: write chainstate to disk every hour":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30611#issuecomment-2366787167)
Rebased to benchmark `reindex-chainstate` with #28358 and a cache size holding the entire utxo set.

> the full pre-assumevalid IBD consistently takes ~45 minutes (8%) longer after the change

I got a hold of an HDD, and surprisingly my benchmarks show the opposite. I kept the blocksdir on the SSD and only had the datadir on the HDD to isolate the effects of this change. When changing from writing at the end to writing every hour, writing every hour was ~25 minutes (6%) faster.

| Command
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "depends: Fix build with `MULTIPROCESS=1` in Guix environment":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30940#issuecomment-2366813947)
```
x86_64

753aee81b01ff7a560a6c2c9ad64e2f3d3a535d0f5484364ea6b0f7ac7d8d595 guix-build-953aa067c565/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
2eec13b0a0a28d16b9ec2b09908d6785666b49cd2076fd7b677259be0f30d624 guix-build-953aa067c565/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-953aa067c565-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
732591be3acdc241d8d7a649bad755561dafe97839e00105682d962844acbe54 guix-build-953aa067c565/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-953aa067c565-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
279a5e977129a58cd743ac4
...

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Write best block to disk before backup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30678#pullrequestreview-2320866299)
ACK bd8fee512301059cc03673099422c19b39f2ed65

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: Write best block to disk before backup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30678#discussion_r1770567400)
nit: `w` would throw an error if used prior to loading the wallet. Should first load the wallet and secondly call `get_wallet_rpc`.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: Write best block to disk before backup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30678#discussion_r1770567603)
nit: could call `address_to_scriptpubkey()` only once outside the for loop.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "depends: Fix build with `MULTIPROCESS=1` in Guix environment":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30940#issuecomment-2366814938)
On the demo branch:

```
MULTIPROCESS=1 ./contrib/guix/guix-build

... # in progress
```