1 2017-03-13 00:47:40	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15maaku opened pull request #9981: Bloom: Consider witness script pushes in bloom filter check. (06master...06segwit-bloom-filter) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9981
  2 2017-03-13 01:41:31	0|Hisham|Hello ?
  3 2017-03-13 01:42:15	0|Hisham|Any core developer online please ?
  4 2017-03-13 01:48:45	0|sipa|maybe!
  5 2017-03-13 01:49:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15maaku closed pull request #9981: Bloom: Consider witness script pushes in bloom filter check. (06master...06segwit-bloom-filter) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9981
  6 2017-03-13 01:49:51	0|Hisham|Pieter Wuille
  7 2017-03-13 01:50:15	0|Hisham|At first, it's my pleasure to talk to you :)
  8 2017-03-13 01:50:45	0|Hisham|If you don't mind, I would like to discuss something with you regarding SegWit UASF
  9 2017-03-13 01:51:11	0|Hisham|Can we talk please ?
 10 2017-03-13 01:53:01	0|BlueMatt|dear god, dont ask to ask, just ask
 11 2017-03-13 01:53:19	0|Hisham|:S
 12 2017-03-13 01:53:34	0|Hisham|Guys, I know you are nice to people, c'mon, what happened ?
 13 2017-03-13 01:54:18	0|Hisham|Maybe you are busy or something, does politeness and taking permission is considered a crime nowadays ?
 14 2017-03-13 01:55:01	0|BlueMatt|it is generally discouraged on irc
 15 2017-03-13 01:55:11	0|BlueMatt|text-based communication is slow enough already :(
 16 2017-03-13 01:55:36	0|Hisham|Ok I see and understand, no problem :)
 17 2017-03-13 01:55:49	0|BlueMatt|engineers, you know
 18 2017-03-13 01:56:10	0|Hisham|Here is one as well, Mechanical and a CNC programmer :)
 19 2017-03-13 01:57:09	0|Hisham|I was going to be a colleague, but I had a nasty doctor who let me hate CS, Java to be precise.
 20 2017-03-13 01:57:43	0|gmaxwell|google for "don't ask to ask"-- beyond being wasteful, it's considered rude because it asks people to commit to an open ended conversation which they may not be interested in when they know the details.
 21 2017-03-13 01:58:41	0|gmaxwell|as far as your question, all the discussion on that has been on the mailing list, I don't think anyone here has been involved in it (though perhaps I'm incorrect, as I haven't been following it)
 22 2017-03-13 01:59:07	0|sipa|Hisham: just ask whatever you want to ask
 23 2017-03-13 01:59:32	0|Hisham|Thanks for the clarification Gregory.
 24 2017-03-13 01:59:49	0|Hisham|But guys, for God sake take it easy on me.
 25 2017-03-13 02:00:08	0|sipa|yes, get to the point :)
 26 2017-03-13 02:00:20	0|Hisham|I will.
 27 2017-03-13 02:02:12	0|Hisham|I'm a normal old Bitcoiner since the days of CPU and browser mining but I've got highly involved at 2014, I've read a lot about Bitcoin and you can I'm my life is oriented to it for many reasons.
 28 2017-03-13 02:03:35	0|Hisham|When I saw the blocksize debate, I felt that I can't stand on the sidelines and try to help or at least understand and engage in conversations, maybe I can do something for all the BS happening around us.
 29 2017-03-13 02:04:18	0|achow101|Hisham: please just ask your question. none of this preamble is necessary. I hate to break it to you, but no one cares about your backstory. Please just get straight to the point and ask your question.
 30 2017-03-13 02:05:10	0|Hisham|No problem, I understand, sorry.
 31 2017-03-13 02:06:40	0|Hisham|As some of you may witness, Shaloin Fry made what we can call a SegWit UASF.
 32 2017-03-13 02:07:06	0|Hisham|As I understand, it needs consensus, if I'm not mistaken.
 33 2017-03-13 02:07:36	0|Hisham|How can we get this implemented if there is a chance for it to be implemented ?
 34 2017-03-13 02:08:01	0|sipa|no politics here, please
 35 2017-03-13 02:08:12	0|BlueMatt|Hisham: if you want a UASF to happen, go start talking to the community - talk to businesses and users
 36 2017-03-13 02:08:17	0|BlueMatt|such things are not for us to decide
 37 2017-03-13 02:09:12	0|BlueMatt|Hisham: relevant is bluematt.bitcoin.ninja/2017/02/28/bitcoin-trustlessness/ (and also #bitcoin, not really #bitcoin-core-dev)
 38 2017-03-13 02:09:59	0|Hisham|I understand, but from technical POV, is there a chance for intergation ?
 39 2017-03-13 02:10:07	0|Hisham|*integration ?
 40 2017-03-13 02:10:12	0|sipa|implementing it is absolutely trivial
 41 2017-03-13 02:10:21	0|sipa|the only question is whether we should
 42 2017-03-13 02:10:36	0|sipa|and generally the answer to that is "if it's clearly uncontroversial"
 43 2017-03-13 02:10:37	0|BlueMatt|i believe code was already written, as for people actually using that code....<BlueMatt> such things are not for us to decide
 44 2017-03-13 02:11:47	0|Hisham|Pieter, may you elaborate more please on this "if it's clearly uncontroversial"
 45 2017-03-13 02:11:53	0|Hisham|?
 46 2017-03-13 02:12:08	0|BlueMatt|maybe this is a better topic for #bitcoin, its not really a development topic
 47 2017-03-13 02:12:36	0|Hisham|Ok, since I'm not welcomed form the beginning.
 48 2017-03-13 02:12:51	0|BlueMatt|Hisham: I'm happy to go discuss it further on #bitcoin
 49 2017-03-13 02:13:27	0|Hisham|Ok, can we talk there now please along with Pieter ?
 50 2017-03-13 05:57:49	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7e58b41bd7ce...f8a709161f37
 51 2017-03-13 05:57:50	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14819b513 15Matt Corallo: Add missing braces in semaphore posts in net
 52 2017-03-13 05:57:50	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e007b24 15Matt Corallo: Fix shutdown hang with >= 8 -addnodes set...
 53 2017-03-13 05:57:51	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f8a7091 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9953: Fix shutdown hang with >= 8 -addnodes set...
 54 2017-03-13 05:58:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9953: Fix shutdown hang with >= 8 -addnodes set (06master...062017-03-exit-with-addnode) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9953
 55 2017-03-13 06:02:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f8a709161f37...afcd7c0e52d8
 56 2017-03-13 06:02:01	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14af61d9f 15Russell Yanofsky: Add COutput::fSafe member for safe handling of unconfirmed outputs...
 57 2017-03-13 06:02:01	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14dcf2112 15NicolasDorier: Add safe flag to listunspent result
 58 2017-03-13 06:02:02	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14afcd7c0 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9830: Add safe flag to listunspent result...
 59 2017-03-13 06:02:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9830: Add safe flag to listunspent result (06master...06listunspenttrusted) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9830
 60 2017-03-13 06:45:15	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 140068361 15Cory Fields: release: add win detached sig creator and our cert chain...
 61 2017-03-13 06:45:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/afcd7c0e52d8...2cc0df1fcecc
 62 2017-03-13 06:45:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f642753 15Cory Fields: release: create a bundle for the new signing script...
 63 2017-03-13 06:45:17	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1409fe2d9 15Cory Fields: release: update docs to show basic codesigning procedure
 64 2017-03-13 06:45:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9514: release: Windows signing script (06master...06win-signing-script) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9514
 65 2017-03-13 06:49:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2cc0df1fcecc...fa99663bec1d
 66 2017-03-13 06:49:09	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fd5e905 15Matt Corallo: Make verify-commits.sh non-recursive
 67 2017-03-13 06:49:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148ed849f 15Matt Corallo: Fix travis failing to fetch keys from the sks keyserver pool...
 68 2017-03-13 06:49:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14efc06c2 15Matt Corallo: If GNU sha512sum is missing, try perl shasum in verify-commits
 69 2017-03-13 06:49:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9940: Fix verify-commits on OSX, update for new bad Tree-SHA512, point travis to different keyservers (06master...062017-03-verify-commits-no-recursion) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9940
 70 2017-03-13 08:53:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #9983: tests: Convert selected tests to using named RPC arguments (06master...062017_03_rpc_tests_named_arguments) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9983
 71 2017-03-13 13:43:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fa99663bec1d...8040ae6fc576
 72 2017-03-13 13:43:54	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143b092bd 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: util: Properly handle errors during log message formatting...
 73 2017-03-13 13:43:54	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b651270 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: util: Throw tinyformat::format_error on formatting error...
 74 2017-03-13 13:43:55	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148040ae6 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9963: util: Properly handle errors during log message formatting...
 75 2017-03-13 13:44:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9963: util: Properly handle errors during log message formatting (06master...062017_03_handle_exception_tinyformat) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9963
 76 2017-03-13 14:12:31	0|MarcoFalke_lab|wumpus: I think you need to enable the verify commits pre push hook.
 77 2017-03-13 14:12:45	0|MarcoFalke_lab|Alternatively, someone could fix the bug in github-merge
 78 2017-03-13 14:12:53	0|wumpus|which bug?
 79 2017-03-13 14:13:25	0|MarcoFalke_lab|It will calculate the hash of the files in the working directory, instead of the ones in git
 80 2017-03-13 14:14:15	0|wumpus|right, that should be fixed
 81 2017-03-13 14:16:10	0|wumpus|without that it's kind of useless and we should disable the hashing completely
 82 2017-03-13 14:16:34	0|wumpus|seems easy enough to do though, just request the data from git
 83 2017-03-13 14:17:28	0|MarcoFalke_lab|Why not do the hard reset early? I mean at some point the script does the hard reset anyway, so the data is lost regardless
 84 2017-03-13 14:17:53	0|wumpus|it shouldn't do any hard resets
 85 2017-03-13 14:18:13	0|MarcoFalke_lab|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/devtools/github-merge.py#L290
 86 2017-03-13 14:18:52	0|wumpus|okay, yeah I don't really like that solution. It should hash what is in git, not what is in the current working directory
 87 2017-03-13 14:19:49	0|MarcoFalke_lab|ok, fine.
 88 2017-03-13 14:20:00	0|wumpus|otherwise there's always a window for races
 89 2017-03-13 14:20:38	0|MarcoFalke_lab|jup, it is the cleaner solution.
 90 2017-03-13 14:21:45	0|wumpus|working on it now - apparently ls-files gives the blob ids, that can be passed as-is to git cat-file
 91 2017-03-13 14:22:38	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: yes, iirc that was annoying but i dont remember why now....verify-commits does cat-file $COMMIT_ID:$FILE_PATH
 92 2017-03-13 14:23:18	0|wumpus|BlueMatt: ah, that likely works just as well
 93 2017-03-13 14:24:06	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: if you can get it to work some other way, though, use that...I kinda liked how merge did the hashes via checkout and verify-commits used a different approach, but it really doesnt matter all that much
 94 2017-03-13 14:25:27	0|wumpus|well how the sha is computed doesn't affect how hard it is to use, it does affect whether the output is correct, which is arguably very important
 95 2017-03-13 14:25:36	0|BlueMatt|indeed
 96 2017-03-13 14:26:43	0|BlueMatt|anyway, this is too inconsequential to nitpick over :P
 97 2017-03-13 14:27:21	0|wumpus|I'm kind of annoyed at travis tripping up all the time though, if that keeps happening I'll hvae to disable the verify-commits check there. SO let's please just get it working
 98 2017-03-13 14:27:31	0|BlueMatt|i think it should be good now
 99 2017-03-13 14:27:43	0|BlueMatt|it failed a number of times just downloading the pubkeys because the sks pool was broken
100 2017-03-13 14:27:53	0|BlueMatt|but we changed to subset which appears to possibly be more stable
101 2017-03-13 14:28:02	0|BlueMatt|i do not believe we have otherwise failed in some time
102 2017-03-13 14:28:19	0|BlueMatt|hmmm, no, failed again this morning
103 2017-03-13 14:28:22	0|BlueMatt|I'll go take a look
104 2017-03-13 14:28:45	0|wumpus|according to MarcoFalke_lab it failed due to my merge script miscomputing the SHA
105 2017-03-13 14:28:53	0|MarcoFalke_lab|BlueMatt: It used the 'old' server url
106 2017-03-13 14:29:11	0|MarcoFalke_lab|The other failure was due to the wrong sha
107 2017-03-13 14:29:12	0|BlueMatt|that was once, looks like it also once failed to retreive pubkeys
108 2017-03-13 14:29:12	0|BlueMatt|wtf
109 2017-03-13 14:29:28	0|BlueMatt|how did it do that? it now points to subset???
110 2017-03-13 14:29:47	0|MarcoFalke_lab|BlueMatt: IIRC the subset-patch was not merged at that time
111 2017-03-13 14:30:04	0|BlueMatt|yes it was, the very top commit failed and the second-to-top merge was the subset change
112 2017-03-13 14:30:12	0|wumpus|what subset patch?
113 2017-03-13 14:30:13	0|BlueMatt|im super confused
114 2017-03-13 14:30:27	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: part of #9940 was to change the server gpg fetches the keys from
115 2017-03-13 14:30:30	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9940 | Fix verify-commits on OSX, update for new bad Tree-SHA512, point travis to different keyservers by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9940 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
116 2017-03-13 14:30:48	0|wumpus|ok, confusing
117 2017-03-13 14:30:49	0|MarcoFalke_lab|Right
118 2017-03-13 14:31:01	0|MarcoFalke_lab|Probably just a travis network hickup
119 2017-03-13 14:31:10	0|petertodd|BlueMatt: why not have the merge script get the pubkeys from the repo itself?
120 2017-03-13 14:31:24	0|BlueMatt|MarcoFalke_lab: no, look at the build, it tried to fetch from pool., not subset.pool.
121 2017-03-13 14:31:45	0|BlueMatt|petertodd: yea, I think thats the next step, I was thinking subset might help, but...
122 2017-03-13 14:31:58	0|BlueMatt|still need to do a --refresh-keys
123 2017-03-13 14:32:04	0|BlueMatt|but need a backup
124 2017-03-13 14:32:24	0|petertodd|BlueMatt: better to make the whole thing deterministic; if verify commits doesn't run because a key is missing, fix that!
125 2017-03-13 14:33:09	0|BlueMatt|oh, no, I'm wrong, github is listing me commits out of order
126 2017-03-13 14:33:09	0|BlueMatt|wtf
127 2017-03-13 14:33:48	0|wumpus|yes it does that, it uses a stupid sort ordering for commits
128 2017-03-13 14:34:05	0|wumpus|by date instead of chronologically according to the repo
129 2017-03-13 14:34:06	0|BlueMatt|oh, ok, yes, the failure occurred before the subset merge, and then another afterwards due to bad sha512
130 2017-03-13 14:34:24	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: well i was only looking at merge commits, i think github actually just had a hiccup
131 2017-03-13 14:35:18	0|BlueMatt|anyway, I restarted the build on the >=8 -addnode fix merge, which should pass this time, if there are any non-sha512-related failures we'll switch to pulling keys from in-repo
132 2017-03-13 14:52:40	0|wumpus|argh, git cat-file blob <blob> is slow compared to the current script
133 2017-03-13 14:54:26	0|wumpus|oh it can work in batch mode, that's cool
134 2017-03-13 14:54:54	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: its hella slow
135 2017-03-13 14:54:58	0|BlueMatt|like, insanely slow
136 2017-03-13 14:55:17	0|wumpus|also in batch mode? I think the overhead right now is spawning a process for every file
137 2017-03-13 14:55:41	0|BlueMatt|hmm, not sure, didnt try, but you need to separate out different files for our current hash format
138 2017-03-13 14:56:40	0|wumpus|it prints a header per file
139 2017-03-13 14:56:41	0|wumpus|"84e7eb60d70d9fae3bdaae7f04f9f08fecaf2052 blob 150829"
140 2017-03-13 14:56:49	0|BlueMatt|ahh, ok
141 2017-03-13 15:06:10	0|wumpus|ooh it's fast in batch mode
142 2017-03-13 15:07:26	0|BlueMatt|argh, great, now i need to make verify-commits use batch mode
143 2017-03-13 15:07:36	0|BlueMatt|:P
144 2017-03-13 15:15:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #9984: devtools: Make github-merge compute SHA512 from git, instead of worktree (06master...062017_03_merge_hash_git) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9984
145 2017-03-13 16:45:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15NicolasDorier opened pull request #9985: [QT] Show more descriptive label for pay to yourself entries (06master...06watchonlylabel) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9985
146 2017-03-13 20:35:06	0|gmaxwell|Apparently IBD on 0.14 OOMs on 2GB (at least on an odroid c2, as expirenced by sipa and someone on reddit); due to the mempool loaning allowing it to achieve peak memory at IBD rather than sometime later.
147 2017-03-13 20:35:21	0|gmaxwell|I suppose it's better to crash during IBD rather than later...
148 2017-03-13 20:39:56	0|achow101|gmaxwell: someone has reported that in an issue and on bitcointalk too
149 2017-03-13 20:40:43	0|gmaxwell|achow101: well the answer for them right now is to lower their dbcache/maxmempool, I recommended 150/150.
150 2017-03-13 20:41:03	0|gmaxwell|It's not really a regression in 0.14, the same devices would eventually crash with 0.13.x, just later.
151 2017-03-13 20:46:10	0|sipa|well, not necessarily, but they would with -dbcache=600
152 2017-03-13 20:46:27	0|sipa|so we've effectively just raised the default dbcache during IBD
153 2017-03-13 20:51:06	0|gmaxwell|sipa: say dbcache is 300, and mempool is 300.. eventually dbcache will be full and mempool will be full.... sooo similar peak memory usage, no?
154 2017-03-13 20:51:25	0|gmaxwell|(or would you argue that because the leveldb batch can result in 2x memory, that we should be adding half the mempool to the dbcache?)
155 2017-03-13 20:56:10	0|sipa|gmaxwell: right, that's what i'm saying
156 2017-03-13 20:56:25	0|sipa|with 300 MB dbcache + 300 MB mempool, you can use up to 900 MB at flush time
157 2017-03-13 20:56:39	0|sipa|with 600 MB dbcache + 0 MB mempool, you can use up to 1200 MB at flush time
158 2017-03-13 20:57:24	0|gmaxwell|so perhaps a patch we should do quickly and backport is to add half the unused memory to the dbcache.  Can you see if that would make your odroid c2 successfully sync?
159 2017-03-13 20:57:32	0|sipa|BUT, we should probably halve the -dbcache setting as well, because someone who configures 2300 MB of dbcache does not expect the application to suddenly use 4600 MB, regardless of mempool borrowing
160 2017-03-13 20:57:51	0|gmaxwell|hm. so perhaps half the units, double the default?
161 2017-03-13 20:58:00	0|gmaxwell|halve*
162 2017-03-13 20:58:18	0|sipa|or just fix leveldb to not require the whole batch to be stored in a single std::string.
163 2017-03-13 20:58:37	0|gmaxwell|yea, but would we backport that for 0.14.1?
164 2017-03-13 20:58:49	0|sipa|depends on how trivial it is, i think
165 2017-03-13 20:59:01	0|gmaxwell|(I think we need to do something for 0.14.1 but it could be something dumb like halving the mempool loan)
166 2017-03-13 21:00:05	0|sipa|yeah, that would fix the 'unexpectedness' of the memory loaning
167 2017-03-13 21:00:11	0|sipa|but not the incorrectness of the estimate
168 2017-03-13 21:03:22	0|luke-jr|is there a reason to use dbcache post-sync?
169 2017-03-13 21:04:08	0|sipa|yes, much faster block verification
170 2017-03-13 21:04:54	0|sipa|even with sigcache
171 2017-03-13 21:06:21	0|luke-jr|but why not commit it after each post-sync block immediately?
172 2017-03-13 21:06:34	0|luke-jr|it doesn't grow that much from just one block, does it?
173 2017-03-13 21:06:44	0|sipa|it can grow by 20 MB or so from one block
174 2017-03-13 21:07:12	0|sipa|and flushing slows down future blocks
175 2017-03-13 21:07:18	0|luke-jr|hmm
176 2017-03-13 21:08:25	0|sipa|with per-txout caching, the max (and typical) growth of the cache per block will be much less
177 2017-03-13 21:08:38	0|gmaxwell|much (most?) of dbcache's gains come from avoiding writes entirely for utxo that never need to make it to disk.
178 2017-03-13 21:08:43	0|sipa|indeed.
179 2017-03-13 21:09:06	0|sipa|though avoiding writes can always be moved out of the critical path of block validation
180 2017-03-13 21:09:33	0|sipa|in synced state, it still prevents recent utxos from needing to be read from disk
181 2017-03-13 21:12:52	0|nemgun|Hello guys, thank you for 0.14, i am resyncing, and it uses far less CPU
182 2017-03-13 21:12:56	0|luke-jr|sipa: aside from validation, that's probably useful for external tools accessing them via RPC?
183 2017-03-13 21:13:46	0|sipa|luke-jr: i believe gettxout will use the cache
184 2017-03-13 21:14:01	0|sipa|luke-jr: gettxoutsetinfo always flushes to disk, and then iterates over the leveldb state
185 2017-03-13 21:16:11	0|TD-Linux|<gmaxwell> I suppose it's better to crash during IBD rather than later... <- yeah though super annoying when pruning.
186 2017-03-13 21:19:17	0|gmaxwell|oh my we should probably only be pruning after sync flushes.
187 2017-03-13 21:20:58	0|jouke|w/win 24
188 2017-03-13 21:21:03	0|jouke|>_<
189 2017-03-13 21:21:39	0|sipa|gmaxwell: we do
190 2017-03-13 21:21:50	0|sipa|pruning always triggers a flush
191 2017-03-13 21:25:08	0|TD-Linux|sipa, were you pruning on your c2? if so did you hit https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9001
192 2017-03-13 21:25:32	0|sipa|TD-Linux: i'm not pruning (yet)
193 2017-03-13 21:25:39	0|sipa|128GB microsd card ftw
194 2017-03-13 22:44:48	0|luke-jr|I wonder if there's a safe way to catch bad_alloc, drop dbcache/mempool stuff, and resume cleanly?
195 2017-03-13 23:40:43	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #9987: Remove unused code (06master...06remove-unused-code) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9987