💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Cannot sync with limited RAM and Swap":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24700#issuecomment-1483100077)
To rule out that this was caused by bitcoin-qt, @BebeSparkelSparkel could also try to run with just bitcoind?

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Cannot sync with limited RAM and Swap":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24700#issuecomment-1483102824)
Ah good catch, I missed he was running `bitcoin-qt` (and foolishly _assumed_ on a low powered device like that it would be `bitcoind`)... In the meantime I can re-test with `bitcoin-qt`.

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Cannot sync with limited RAM and Swap":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24700#issuecomment-1483113206)
Update: `bitcoin-qt` has passed headers sync and entered into IBD on the same 1GB machine with swap disabled.

I think therefore unless @BebeSparkelSparkel confirms this is still an issue for him on his hardware we can close this one out soon.

📝 theStack opened a pull request: "test: various `converttopsbt` check cleanups in rpc_psbt.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27325)
In the functional test rpc_psbt.py, some comments around the `converttopsbt` RPC checks are wrong or outdated and can be removed:

> _Error could be either "TX decode failed" (segwit inputs causes
> parsing to fail) or "Inputs must not have scriptSigs and
> scriptWitnesses"_

Decoding a valid TX with at least one input always succeeds with the [heuristic](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/e352f5ab6b60ec1cc549997275e945238508cdee/src/core_read.cpp#L126), i.e. this comment is not right
...

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Cannot sync with limited RAM and Swap":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24700#issuecomment-1483122740)
Also, @BebeSparkelSparkel was running the debian package, which is compiled differently. And on arm64, not x86.

But yeah closing for now. Please let us know if this is still an issue or if this should be re-opened.

If you still have the arm machine running, it would be good to re-check with the binaries from https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "Cannot sync with limited RAM and Swap"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24700)

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "init: Error if ignored bitcoin.conf file is found":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27302#discussion_r1147851308)
Ok I understand now, I tried removing it but now I see the environment variables are important for setting the initial "where's the conf" directory without spoiling `-datadir`. I also notice `get_temp_default_datadir()` has a windows branch but windows will skip this test anyway! Not a bad idea to leave it in there anyway though I guess.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "init: Error if ignored bitcoin.conf file is found":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27302#discussion_r1147851971)
> allowignoredconf

yeah

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Add pool based memory resource":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25325#discussion_r1147852238)
> The code generation is a bit different when you use unsigned types, then the `+ (bytes == 0)` version is the shortedst for me. In my microbenchmark the `+ (bytes == 0)` is also fastest, but in practice its most likely irrelevant

Yes, it seems to be one instruction shorter after updating @LarryRuane's examples (thanks for doing them) to `size_t` and checking with gcc 12.2 and clang 16.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Add pool based memory resource":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25325#discussion_r1147852733)
(Only if you have to retouch, or maybe in a follow-up), perhaps add this comment:

```cpp
BOOST_TEST(b != block); // as `b` has to come from `::operator new` and not from the freelist

👍 jonatack approved a pull request: "Add pool based memory resource"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25325)
Nice review work, @LarryRuane.

re-ACK 9f947fc3d4b779f017332135323b34e8f216f613

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: Use TSan new runtime (llvm-16, take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27298#issuecomment-1483134573)
> Does this happen on master as well?

A different failure with master (e352f5ab6b60ec1cc549997275e945238508cdee):
```bash
4.0K /home/fedora/bitcoin/releases/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Making check in src
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/fedora/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/src'
make[2]: Entering directory '/home/fedora/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/src'
make minisketch/test
make[3]: Entering directory '/home/fedora/bitcoin/ci/
...

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "guix: combine and document `enable_werror`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27326)
Combine into `hardened-glibc`.
Document why we don't use `--disable-werror` directly.

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Configuring-and-compiling.html
> By default, the GNU C Library is built with -Werror. If you wish
> to build without this option (for example, if building with a
> newer version of GCC than this version of the GNU C Library was
> tested with, so new warnings cause the build with -Werror to fail),
> you can configure with --disable-werror.

💬 Ayms commented on pull request "Ignore datacarrier limits for dataless OP_RETURN outputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27261#issuecomment-1483171462)
Well, reading this 10 times, I am not sur to see what it has to do with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27043

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "Add pool based memory resource":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25325#issuecomment-1483180518)
ACK 9f947fc3d4b779f017332135323b34e8f216f613

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "guix: combine and document `enable_werror`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27326#issuecomment-1483200464)
> Document why we don't use `--disable-werror` directly.

Concept ACK on that.

> Combine into `hardened-glibc`.

Not against it, just clarifying. What are benefits of doing that?

📝 SValentyn opened a pull request: "I want more bitcoins! Haven't had time to buy at $0.2 😒"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27327)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

✅ pinheadmz closed a pull request: "I want more bitcoins! Haven't had time to buy at $0.2 😒"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27327)

📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "I want more bitcoins! Haven't had time to buy at $0.2 😒"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27327)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

💬 jnewbery commented on pull request "net: #27257 follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27324#discussion_r1147917681)
Perhaps add a comment on why we don't want to copy `CNetMessage` objects.