💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191418745)
sounds right, I'll sit on this for a bit

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191426977)
Could use `pfrom.m_bip152_highbandwidth_to`?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "wallet: fix deadlock in bdb read write operation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27556#discussion_r1191433122)
Does this comment remain true?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191435827)
what if we just removed the limit, since it's not much of a protection, especially if the missing 10 txns are *nscriptions

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191441529)
Probably better to defer it as an unrelated change anyway?

📝 theuni opened a pull request: "build: Fix shared lib linking for darwin with lld"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27628)
Solves one of the last remaining blockers for #21778. Fixes lld linking shared libs for macos via libtool.

lld fails one of libtool's earliest checks [because it happens to output a warning that contains a specific string](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/libtool.git/tree/m4/libtool.m4#n999):


> # If there is a non-empty error log, and "single_module"
> # appears in it, assume the flag caused a linker warning

And here is the test being run:
> x86_64-apple-darwin-ld: warning:
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: Fix shared lib linking for darwin with lld":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27628#issuecomment-1544323444)
Ping @fanquake

And @hebasto, because I know you love libtool hacks ;)

👍 hernanmarino approved a pull request: "refactor: Add util::Result failure values, multiple error and warning messages"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25665#pullrequestreview-1423032563)
re ACK 28a954c7034077ac3a45083dd5e2b5cdb4d4cdde

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: Fix shared lib linking for darwin with lld":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27628#issuecomment-1544326369)
Concept ACK. Note that this is also shown to be working in #21778, as the build there is succeeding.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[23.2] Backports for rc1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27624#issuecomment-1544329711)
Added #27610, as well as all other changes required to cut an rc1.

> Are you going to add https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27610 to this?

Yes. Note that the second commit from that PR is not a clean cherry-pick.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191449571)
don't love your name suggestion; changed the initialization though

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191449589)
I think the limit's fine; when you start up with an empty mempool, you'll be requesting most of the transactions in the block because your mempool's empty, and there's no need to do that three times in parallel. Could perhaps have the limit work the other way: if you've already got N txs and need K txs, and `0 < K <= N/4 + 10`; then if the block just has ten 100kvB txs, you won't request them multiple times.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Fix shared lib linking for darwin with lld":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27628#issuecomment-1544334336)
> Solves one of the last remaining blockers for #21778.

Concept ACK on that.

> And @hebasto, because I know you love libtool hacks ;)

I believe we'll manage to switch to CMake earlier :)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "wallet: fix deadlock in bdb read write operation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27556#discussion_r1191456854)
A note for myself: Seems unfortunate to `reset` a `std::unique_ptr` instance explicitly instead of using its RAII capabilities.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: Fix shared lib linking for darwin with lld":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27628#issuecomment-1544340008)
> > And @hebasto, because I know you love libtool hacks ;)
>
> I believe we'll manage to switch to CMake earlier :)

Hahaha, you're probably right about that. But at least this way there's no "well it didn't work with autotools so it doesn't have to work with CMake" excuse :p

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "doc: remove version number from bips.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27629)
This always just needs "bumping" (see previous rc type pulls), and the version number is already whichever version of the code you acquired bips.md with.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Parallel compact block downloads, take 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27626#discussion_r1191458103)
done

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "doc: remove version number from bips.md":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27629#issuecomment-1544343736)
lgtm ACK 308caf326db5619141f0c224fa48410293d59330

📝 sdaftuar opened a pull request: "p2p: Increase tx relay rate"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27630)
In the presence of smaller transactions on the network, blocks can sustain a higher relay rate than 7tx/second. In this event, the per-peer inventory queues can grow too large.

Using 11 tx/second as an estimate for the max network throughput, this commit bumps the rate up to 22 tx/s (for inbound peers), providing a factor of 2 safety margin.

Outbound peers continue to receive relayed transactions at 2.5x the rate of inbound peers, for a rate of 55tx/second.

Note that this triples the pe
...

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "doc: remove version number from bips.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27629#pullrequestreview-1423066729)
ACK 308caf326db5619141f0c224fa48410293d59330