💬 fjahr commented on pull request "index: Fix coinstats overflow and introduce index versioning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#issuecomment-2939541299)
I have pushed a new version with a simplified approach as suggested by @maflcko. This puts the fixed version into a new path and removes the old version after a grace period. This makes downgrading possible and uses less code. I think this approach isn't too far off from the migration since syncing the index and running the migration are both processes that take some time.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#issuecomment-2939541299)
I have pushed a new version with a simplified approach as suggested by @maflcko. This puts the fixed version into a new path and removes the old version after a grace period. This makes downgrading possible and uses less code. I think this approach isn't too far off from the migration since syncing the index and running the migration are both processes that take some time.
💬 maluquices commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939590089)
> Pretty much every change to Bitcoin Core is controversial in the sense that there's someone out there who doesn't want the change to happen, or wants it to happen in a different way.
Statement that's "technically" true but leaves out critical context. This PR is the reason Core dropped from 97% to below 90% adoption. It's not trivial disagreement, far from it.
> Controversy needs to be weighed against the reasonableness of that controversy, and where the controversy is coming from. Here,
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939590089)
> Pretty much every change to Bitcoin Core is controversial in the sense that there's someone out there who doesn't want the change to happen, or wants it to happen in a different way.
Statement that's "technically" true but leaves out critical context. This PR is the reason Core dropped from 97% to below 90% adoption. It's not trivial disagreement, far from it.
> Controversy needs to be weighed against the reasonableness of that controversy, and where the controversy is coming from. Here,
...
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939644399)
> dropped from 97% to below 90% adoption
> flies directly in the face of open-source development principles.
@maluquices this is a contradiction. Open source means anyone can fork the code, change it, release it, and use it. Bitcoin Core has been discussed, reviewed and maintained by hundreds of experts for over a decade and turned an idea into a two trillion dollar asset. Everyone is free to use Bitcoin Core, or to use software reviewed and maintained by any other group of people of any
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939644399)
> dropped from 97% to below 90% adoption
> flies directly in the face of open-source development principles.
@maluquices this is a contradiction. Open source means anyone can fork the code, change it, release it, and use it. Bitcoin Core has been discussed, reviewed and maintained by hundreds of experts for over a decade and turned an idea into a two trillion dollar asset. Everyone is free to use Bitcoin Core, or to use software reviewed and maintained by any other group of people of any
...
💬 theStack commented on pull request "refactor: Convert GenTxid to `std::variant`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32631#issuecomment-2939644770)
Concept ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32631#issuecomment-2939644770)
Concept ACK
📝 willcl-ark opened a pull request: "guix: warn and abort when SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678)
Fixes: #29935
Current behaviour will by-default use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH from the environment without warning. This breaks the default reproducibility from a guix build.
Warn when and exit when this variable is set, and
FORCE_SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is unset.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678)
Fixes: #29935
Current behaviour will by-default use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH from the environment without warning. This breaks the default reproducibility from a guix build.
Warn when and exit when this variable is set, and
FORCE_SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is unset.
💬 maluquices commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939708994)
@pinheadmz a "technically" accurate gotcha attempt that ignores the deeper issue. The adoption drop signals a real erosion of trust, not just a casual exercise of open-source freedom. When a change pushes away a substantial portion of the user base, dismissing it as "just fork it" ignores a practical reality. Open-source principles are a little more evolved than "the code is public" and require transparent decision-making that respects diverse input. When "reasonable" is defined by the few and d
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939708994)
@pinheadmz a "technically" accurate gotcha attempt that ignores the deeper issue. The adoption drop signals a real erosion of trust, not just a casual exercise of open-source freedom. When a change pushes away a substantial portion of the user base, dismissing it as "just fork it" ignores a practical reality. Open-source principles are a little more evolved than "the code is public" and require transparent decision-making that respects diverse input. When "reasonable" is defined by the few and d
...
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939767822)
@maluquices all I'm trying to say is, don't drag "open source" into this conversation. Every single word has been open, as well as years of historical merit of the author and reviewers.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2939767822)
@maluquices all I'm trying to say is, don't drag "open source" into this conversation. Every single word has been open, as well as years of historical merit of the author and reviewers.
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: Change `OutputType` items from `string` into compile-time constants `string_view`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32432#issuecomment-2939811207)
Are you still working on this?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32432#issuecomment-2939811207)
Are you still working on this?
💬 l0rinc commented on issue "bitcoind 29.0 much slower than 28.0 on my system: cause found":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32455#issuecomment-2939857873)
I ran a few reindexes with to try reproducing your issue. Since we don't have compact block announcements during ibd/reindexes (like in your example), after discussing this with @andrewtoth, I've tried `reindex-chainstate` until 888,888 blocks with `-debug=bench -debug=leveldb` to plot the block connect times, comparing 32MiB (master @ 370c5926) with 2MiB (master with lower leveldb file size, v28-like setup @ c9417a59).
----
A differential flame graph comparing the two leveldb file sizes sugg
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32455#issuecomment-2939857873)
I ran a few reindexes with to try reproducing your issue. Since we don't have compact block announcements during ibd/reindexes (like in your example), after discussing this with @andrewtoth, I've tried `reindex-chainstate` until 888,888 blocks with `-debug=bench -debug=leveldb` to plot the block connect times, comparing 32MiB (master @ 370c5926) with 2MiB (master with lower leveldb file size, v28-like setup @ c9417a59).
----
A differential flame graph comparing the two leveldb file sizes sugg
...
💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: wallet: cover wallet passphrase with a null char":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2126494684)
Yes, going to add it.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2126494684)
Yes, going to add it.
💬 sipa commented on pull request "Replace cluster linearization algorithm with SFL":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32545#issuecomment-2939904739)
I've created a repo for benchmark data, and added my results plus @l0rinc's: https://github.com/sipa/lin-benches/tree/main/data
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32545#issuecomment-2939904739)
I've created a repo for benchmark data, and added my results plus @l0rinc's: https://github.com/sipa/lin-benches/tree/main/data
💬 0xB10C commented on issue "Coin Selection tracepoint overreports use of APS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25150#issuecomment-2939916998)
> @0xB10C do you think anything should be done with this tracepoint?
I'm not familiar familiar enough with coin selection to comment on if the tracepoint is broken or how to best fix it.
If it's still useful and being used, would be good to fix it, if not, I'd be happy to remove it. Can always be patched back in for coinselection measurements if needed in an adhoc basis.
AFAIK @murchandamus and @achow101 were the main users when it was added.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25150#issuecomment-2939916998)
> @0xB10C do you think anything should be done with this tracepoint?
I'm not familiar familiar enough with coin selection to comment on if the tracepoint is broken or how to best fix it.
If it's still useful and being used, would be good to fix it, if not, I'd be happy to remove it. Can always be patched back in for coinselection measurements if needed in an adhoc basis.
AFAIK @murchandamus and @achow101 were the main users when it was added.
💬 l0rinc commented on issue "More control of maintenance processes at startup/restart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29662#issuecomment-2939919799)
Hey @domZippilli, LevelDB compaction sucks, especially since it's single threaded. It's why RocksDB has spread it to multiple threads, reducing compaction burden considerably - switching Bitcoin Core experimentally to RocksDB results in an instant ~20% speedup because of this. Unfortunately we can't just switch over, RocksDB is too complicated, at best we can slowly strangle out LevelDB usage, but we can't just drop it.
I have measured a similar compaction scenario in a related post, can you pl
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29662#issuecomment-2939919799)
Hey @domZippilli, LevelDB compaction sucks, especially since it's single threaded. It's why RocksDB has spread it to multiple threads, reducing compaction burden considerably - switching Bitcoin Core experimentally to RocksDB results in an instant ~20% speedup because of this. Unfortunately we can't just switch over, RocksDB is too complicated, at best we can slowly strangle out LevelDB usage, but we can't just drop it.
I have measured a similar compaction scenario in a related post, can you pl
...
💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: wallet: cover wallet passphrase with a null char":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2126558187)
Done
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2126558187)
Done
💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: wallet: cover wallet passphrase with a null char":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#issuecomment-2939979267)
3b90060a2df2b65369117f3ee8afe26be631867d..7cfbb8575e1ffbad5c48e2c461b45dd6ac63d064 address https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2124757170
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#issuecomment-2939979267)
3b90060a2df2b65369117f3ee8afe26be631867d..7cfbb8575e1ffbad5c48e2c461b45dd6ac63d064 address https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#discussion_r2124757170
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "guix: warn and abort when SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678#issuecomment-2939981992)
lgtm ACK 5c4a0f8009cef758be9412428515bfed57b0c923
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678#issuecomment-2939981992)
lgtm ACK 5c4a0f8009cef758be9412428515bfed57b0c923
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: wallet: cover wallet passphrase with a null char":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#issuecomment-2939987081)
lgtm ACK 7cfbb8575e1ffbad5c48e2c461b45dd6ac63d064
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32675#issuecomment-2939987081)
lgtm ACK 7cfbb8575e1ffbad5c48e2c461b45dd6ac63d064
🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "rpc: Note in fundrawtransaction doc, fee rate is for package"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32607#pullrequestreview-2896689686)
ACK f98e1aaf34e347088caa54403521e3b5cb55dd40
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32607#pullrequestreview-2896689686)
ACK f98e1aaf34e347088caa54403521e3b5cb55dd40
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Replace cluster linearization algorithm with SFL":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32545#issuecomment-2940026257)
> Also, is this with 32-bit or 64-bit userspace?
64-bit userspace (AArch64)
```bash
$ file bitcoind
bitcoind: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1, BuildID[sha1]=7e059ec01f7460042910ca4ed15270382269c9d5, for GNU/Linux 3.7.0, with debug_info, not stripped
```
<details>
<summary>additional details</summary>
```bash
$ getconf LONG_BIT
64
$ dpkg --print-architecture
arm64
$ uname -m
aarch64
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32545#issuecomment-2940026257)
> Also, is this with 32-bit or 64-bit userspace?
64-bit userspace (AArch64)
```bash
$ file bitcoind
bitcoind: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1, BuildID[sha1]=7e059ec01f7460042910ca4ed15270382269c9d5, for GNU/Linux 3.7.0, with debug_info, not stripped
```
<details>
<summary>additional details</summary>
```bash
$ getconf LONG_BIT
64
$ dpkg --print-architecture
arm64
$ uname -m
aarch64
...
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: drop `ltcg` for Windows Qt":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32496#issuecomment-2940144750)
Qt + lto works for native, but is broken for Darwin cross builds, so dropped the second commit. This is now just a followup to
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32496#issuecomment-2940144750)
Qt + lto works for native, but is broken for Darwin cross builds, so dropped the second commit. This is now just a followup to