⚠️ fjahr opened an issue: "Node stuck with repeated "Cache size exceeds total space" log message"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27599)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

Bug report from IRC `bitcoin-core-dev`: The node stopped updating the chain tip while printing "Cache size exceeds total space" multiple times per second. Node had to be restarted after "stale tip" messages, then resumed to work normally.

Start of conversation: https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2023-05-08#920380;
User logs: https://jb55.com/s/58818ccccfb21d95.txt

###
...

💬 fjahr commented on issue "Node stuck with repeated "Cache size exceeds total space" log message":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27599#issuecomment-1538754014)
@jb55 just repeating the open questions from IRC here:
- Do you have a custom `maxmempool` setting?
- Do you have the last UpdateTip line your node saw before the cache size messages? the end of those UpdateTip lines shows how big your coins cache was at the end of block validation (@sdaftuar )
- Did this happen around the time when we had the 2 block reorg ~20h ago, i.e. around 788685-788688 (not sure what timezone you are in with those logs)?
- Can you say which version and OS you are on
...

💬 jamesob commented on pull request "assumeutxo (2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27596#issuecomment-1538759099)
CI's passing after a silent conflict in the rebase. I've added a link to @Sjors' snapshot torrent in the PR description.

No known outstanding issues here; ready for testing!

💬 achow101 commented on issue "GCC 13: `-Wdangling-reference` output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26926#issuecomment-1538762824)
Getting these errors with gcc 13.1.1

⚠️ achow101 reopened an issue: "GCC 13: `-Wdangling-reference` output"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26926)
New warnings currently emitted by the shortly-to-be-released GCC 13.
This is building master (eebc24bfc6d2d809952e27c7fe269452f319455f), using GCC `gcc (GCC) 13.0.0 20230115 (Red Hat 13.0.0-0)`:
```bash
external_signer.cpp: In static member function ‘static bool ExternalSigner::Enumerate(const std::string&, std::vector<ExternalSigner>&, std::string)’:
external_signer.cpp:33:25: warning: possibly dangling reference to a temporary [-Wdangling-reference]
33 | const UniValue& error =
...

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "Switch hardened derivation marker to h"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26076)

💬 fjahr commented on issue "Node stuck with repeated "Cache size exceeds total space" log message":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27599#issuecomment-1538784739)
> @jb55 just repeating the open questions from IRC here:
>
> * Do you have a custom `maxmempool` setting?
> * Do you have the last UpdateTip line your node saw before the cache size messages? the end of those UpdateTip lines shows how big your coins cache was at the end of block validation (@sdaftuar )
> * Did this happen around the time when we had the 2 block reorg ~20h ago, i.e. around 788685-788688 (not sure what timezone you are in with those logs)?
> * Can you say which version and
...

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1187734637)
Got it, thanks.

👍 brunoerg approved a pull request: "Move IsDeprecatedRPCEnabled to rpc/util, rm redundant rpcEnableDeprecated"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27322#pullrequestreview-1417299823)
crACK 9ed9b50068a3cbcf48264d814ffe73e0b9ed10b4

nit: s/librairies/libraries in 1a1f3518ed4eb2b18c63d98fbdca10a2cda8bf1e message

💬 disappointed72 commented on issue "CPU DoS on mainnet in debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27586#issuecomment-1538897495)
Same issue with 24.0.1 node today and went back to normal after daemon reload. My node do NOT run in debug mode too.

👍 theuni approved a pull request: "Introduce platform-agnostic `ALWAYS_INLINE` macro"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27575#pullrequestreview-1417374039)
utACK 3f19875d667522412408d06873e87ff8150e49c4

📝 pinheadmz opened a pull request: "Make peer eviction slightly more aggresive to make room for whitelisted inbound connections"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27600)
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8798

Use case: I run a full node that accepts inbound connections and have a `whitebind` setting so my personal light client can always connect, even when `maxconnections` (and particularly all inbound slots) is already full.

Currently when connections are full, if we receive in inbound peer request, we look for a current connection to evict so the new peer can have a slot. To find an evict-able peer we go through all our peers and "protect"
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "whiteconnections should be re-added":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8798#issuecomment-1538967531)
Possible solution WIP: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27600 looking for concept ACKs !

💬 poiuty commented on issue "CPU DoS on mainnet in debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27586#issuecomment-1538980020)
I have the same problem. `bitcoind` started using 100% cpu (single thread) on my servers. I used the binary from https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-24.0.1/bitcoin-24.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz

<img src="https://img.poiuty.com/a/3c/c68204e690ae2d605cfd60e03eee0f3c.jpg">

Built bitcoind from source (v24.0.1.tar.gz). Works fine for an hour now.
```
./configure --without-gui --disable-zmq --disable-wallet
```

<img src="https://img.poiuty.com/a/7b/5234d849fcf5248c4a1adaf5011bc57b.jp
...

💬 grubles commented on issue "make check errors on big endian OpenBSD 7.2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26492#issuecomment-1538987958)
Ok I have access to the POWER9 machine I was testing with before now. I have FreeBSD 13.2 powerpc64 running on it at the moment with Bitcoin Core v25.0rc1.

Running the tests with `test/functional/test_runner.py --extended` ended up with quite a few failing:

```
feature_addrman.py | ✖ Failed | 1 s
feature_rbf.py | ✖ Failed | 7 s
feature_segwit.py --legacy-wallet | ✖ Failed | 8 s
rpc_psbt
...

💬 golden-guy commented on issue "CPU DoS on mainnet in debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27586#issuecomment-1539007849)
> Same issue with 24.0.1 node today and went back to normal after daemon reload. My node do NOT run in debug mode too.

Same here using the 24.0.1 binaries NOT running in debug mode since yesterday. (Binaries from https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-24.0.1/bitcoin-24.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz) I didn't restart the node, but used the setban approach as pointed out here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27586#issuecomment-1537784340

Since then, the single core load has decrea
...

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1187734505)
this comment becomes a bit disconnected from the logic itself.

🤔 instagibbs reviewed a pull request: "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#pullrequestreview-1417261502)
Last bit of nitting:

`AcceptPackage` -> `AcceptAncestorPackage`
`AcceptMultipleTransactions` -> `AcceptSubPackage`

With BIP331 I think maybe knowing what an ancestor package is and how it fits
into this code may become clearer?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1187848024)
I know what this means, but kinda... odd that `AncestorPackage` can be `!IsAncestorPackage`

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1187856431)
should just leave this example in in the positive sense of it being accepted?