1 2017-08-28 01:05:47	0|gmaxwell|wumpus: we've caught you now, you've been keeping the time machine hidden from us
  2 2017-08-28 01:05:53	0|gmaxwell|Date:   Fri Feb 17 17:26:01 2017 +0100
  3 2017-08-28 01:05:57	0|gmaxwell|build: bump version to 0.15.99
  4 2017-08-28 01:19:07	0|achow101|lol
  5 2017-08-28 01:21:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ChandlerScheurkogel opened pull request #11172: Fixed a grammar issue. (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11172
  6 2017-08-28 01:44:06	0|midnightmagic|can i use the time machine plz. i gotta deliver a petri dish back about a decade.
  7 2017-08-28 02:48:27	0|meshcollider|Good idea to add an optional bool parameter to decoderawtransaction to override achow101s heuristic test if present? Suggested here:  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10481#issuecomment-325244946
  8 2017-08-28 02:53:42	0|meshcollider|s/decoderawtransaction/fundrawtransaction/
  9 2017-08-28 04:03:45	0|sipa|meshcollider: if we do it for one, we must do it for both
 10 2017-08-28 04:03:52	0|sipa|the same reasoning applies
 11 2017-08-28 04:04:09	0|sipa|except that decoderawtransaction is somewhat less likely to have impact
 12 2017-08-28 04:51:52	0|wallet42|sipa: what bech32hrp do you have in mind for these ?
 13 2017-08-28 04:52:25	0|sipa|wallet42: i'm working on searching for a 12-character checksum with much stronger properties
 14 2017-08-28 04:53:02	0|wallet42|how did you hack space-time? you have more that 24 hours in a day?
 15 2017-08-28 04:53:43	0|sipa|wallet42: by 'working' i mean i have some computers running analysis
 16 2017-08-28 04:54:25	0|sipa|where 'some' means 176 cpu cores ;)
 17 2017-08-28 04:54:46	0|wallet42|i meant that you have an incredible work pace
 18 2017-08-28 04:54:58	0|sipa|heh, thanks :)
 19 2017-08-28 04:59:58	0|meshcollider|he's right haha you seem to be working on everything
 20 2017-08-28 05:02:07	0|luke-jr|lol
 21 2017-08-28 05:05:57	0|wallet42|I was thinking about an easy to implement yet better fee algo for wallet developers. The current situation is bad because many wallets (most that i used) want good user experience and thus chose a fee for them that puts it at the top of the mempool priority queue. If the mempool is bigger than 1 MB, that means they are constantly outcompeting each other.
 22 2017-08-28 05:05:57	0|wallet42|My simple fix would be (by default) use an opt-in RBF. Look at the mean feerate (sat/byte) in the mempool. Substract 1 sat/byte. Use that fee. If the user then complaints, offer him to increase fee via RBF after 1 hour no confirmation.
 23 2017-08-28 05:05:57	0|wallet42|Now there is a drag down instead of drag up in terms of average/mean feerate.
 24 2017-08-28 05:09:18	0|sipa|wallet42: i don't think average necessarily means anything
 25 2017-08-28 05:09:33	0|sipa|anyone can create a near infinite amount of transactions of low fee
 26 2017-08-28 05:38:23	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15AkioNak opened pull request #11173: RPC: Fix currency unit string in the help text (06master...06use_currency_unit_constant) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11173
 27 2017-08-28 06:34:58	0|webuser322|just a reminded, someone please remove https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10821/commits/6b8d872e5e2dd68a5229ec55f5261dae34ff9bdb so SSE4 optimized SHA256 begins being tested/used by default
 28 2017-08-28 06:36:14	0|gmaxwell|webuser322: thanks.
 29 2017-08-28 06:37:57	0|webuser322|np, and the segwit settings faq/guide for miners... the things one think first in the morning ;)
 30 2017-08-28 06:40:26	0|webuser322|\quit have a good day core!
 31 2017-08-28 06:53:09	0|gmaxwell|mental note: we need release notes on the topup stuff and instructions for rescanning
 32 2017-08-28 06:58:02	0|kallewoof|After seeing a bunch of complaints about fee estimation on Bitcoin Core I decided to do some profiling on how well the estimator is doing. My approach may be off, but it seems to be overshooting by a ton.
 33 2017-08-28 06:59:42	0|kallewoof|Approach: every 100 txs that go into mempool, do an estimateSmartFee for 1..10 blocks for conservative and the same for non-conservative, and store that. For every new block, iterate over all stored estimations and increment blocks waited, and check if the fee per kb for each tx is greater than the lowest 10 fee transactions in the block. If it is, count it as "would have gone into the block".
 34 2017-08-28 07:00:51	0|gmaxwell|right now is not a very useful time to look, because the network just spent several days with 50% hashrate gone, and is likely about to spend several days with it gone again.
 35 2017-08-28 07:02:15	0|kallewoof|Feels like something that estimator should take into account. Ideally. As long as it's possible for random miner groups to fork off and make random chains the hash rate is going to be very unstable in the foreseeable future. I guess.
 36 2017-08-28 07:06:36	0|gmaxwell|as far as your strategy goes, one problem is that blocks frequently contain transactions which have fees far lower than would be accepted for your own txn.
 37 2017-08-28 07:06:47	0|gmaxwell|Because the miner is being paid out of band, invisibly to us.
 38 2017-08-28 07:07:00	0|kallewoof|Is it that common?
 39 2017-08-28 07:07:30	0|gmaxwell|yes, enough to seriously distort estimates. It really is the case that they're too high now, however... just pointing out the methodology limitations.
 40 2017-08-28 07:07:46	0|kallewoof|Wow. TIL
 41 2017-08-28 07:08:42	0|kallewoof|FWIW the results I'm seeing after a couple of blocks, even though it may be of limited value as you pointed out:
 42 2017-08-28 07:08:45	0|kallewoof|[bench::fees (    conservative)] 1730 ests, 1730 overshoots (403247 more sat/k/tx), 0 undershoots (0 less sat/k/tx), 0 overblocks (0 blocks/tx), 1557 underblocks (5 blocks/tx)
 43 2017-08-28 07:08:47	0|kallewoof|[bench::fees (non-conservative)] 1704 ests, 1704 overshoots (84916 more sat/k/tx), 0 undershoots (0 less sat/k/tx), 0 overblocks (0 blocks/tx), 1531 underblocks (4 blocks/tx)
 44 2017-08-28 07:09:09	0|wallet42|Is there a website to track out-of-band transaction? eg. mined tx that has not been seen by any (or at least all of the watching) nodes before?
 45 2017-08-28 07:09:24	0|sipa|kallewoof: fee estimation isn't looking at the fees in blocks; it's looking at how long blocks take to confirm
 46 2017-08-28 07:09:40	0|gmaxwell|wallet42: no, but your debug log will show you them if you have compact block debugging enabled.
 47 2017-08-28 07:09:41	0|sipa|and given that it aims for (afaik?) 85%, i would indeed expect that in the majority of cases it overshoots
 48 2017-08-28 07:10:13	0|wallet42|undershoot + rbf!
 49 2017-08-28 07:10:47	0|kallewoof|sipa: I'm trying to find a way for the (arguably common) case where a user wants their tx to go into the next couple of blocks for a reasonable fee. Lots of people seem to manually pick a fee and lots of others are baffled by the high fees estimated.
 50 2017-08-28 07:11:38	0|kallewoof|So I do estimateSmartFee(1..10) and then keep that around and see when the estimation actually put me in towards the bottom fo the block. Is my reasoning off on that? Aside from what gmaxwell said about miners being paid off-band.
 51 2017-08-28 07:11:49	0|gmaxwell|right now if you pick a reasonable fee for 4 blocks based on the mempool it is very likely you will not make it in in 20 blocks... because the hashrate will drop soon, so it may not be as high as you think.
 52 2017-08-28 07:12:13	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: if the hashrate is lower than expected, shouldn't the estimator undershoot?
 53 2017-08-28 07:12:30	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: it would be better if instead you looked at txn it you mempool and saw when they confirm, rather than looking at the block.
 54 2017-08-28 07:12:33	0|sipa|kallewoof: right... i'm certainly not saying the current approach is the right one, but trying to see if an estimation algorithm that is designed to overshoot overshoots seems hardly useful :)
 55 2017-08-28 07:13:11	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: but i'm trying to profile estimateSmartFee(); doing what you say seems like a great next step though.
 56 2017-08-28 07:13:16	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: no, undershooting is quite bad when no rbf is used, the conservative one should hopefully almost never understoot.
 57 2017-08-28 07:13:29	0|kallewoof|sipa: well, 'overshoot' and 'overshoot by 403247 satoshi/k' are different things, IMO
 58 2017-08-28 07:13:36	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: the setting for confirmation targetst is when is quite sure to confirm by, not most likely to.
 59 2017-08-28 07:13:50	0|sipa|kallewoof: fair
 60 2017-08-28 07:14:55	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: so for example, if you predict that fee X will confirm in 5 blocks, you shouldn't think there was an overshoot unless _ALL_ mempool txn with fee X> confirmed by 5 blocks.
 61 2017-08-28 07:15:19	0|gmaxwell|(or virtually all, like 95% of them)
 62 2017-08-28 07:17:07	0|kallewoof|Got it. What I'm seeing now is that txs with "confirm within 5" are going into the next block rather consistently. But this may be because of what you said about the out of band miner payment. Bleh. Maybe I should take the bottom 10 that I also saw in the mempool. I think I can do that.
 63 2017-08-28 07:17:49	0|gmaxwell|well no, right now it really is overshooting. It just doesn't respond fast enouh for capacity changing 100% in hours.
 64 2017-08-28 07:17:59	0|kallewoof|Then again, nothing prevents these people from also broadcasting their super-low-fee tx so that approach isn't really ideal either.
 65 2017-08-28 07:18:17	0|wumpus|gmaxwell: apparently I indeed misconfigured the time machine, now it looks like I bumped 0.14.99 and 0.15.99 in exactly the same second
 66 2017-08-28 07:19:44	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: I think there are two incompatible approaches here: (1) I want my tx to confirm with as low a fee as possible; I can wait a bit, but obviously not forever; (2) I want my tx to confirm within the next few blocks; I am willing to pay extra for this. Right now everyone is being lumped into (2) when it seems a lot of people are of mindset (1).
 67 2017-08-28 07:19:47	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: you can just look at your mempool, and ask for each fee >=X in the mempool at time t, what percentage of them were confirmed by T+5.  Our conservative estimator is designed to try return a number that makes that figure very high like 95%.
 68 2017-08-28 07:20:21	0|gmaxwell|trying to get e.g. 1 block however requires looking at the mempool, which is very hard to do safely with an unsupervised approach.
 69 2017-08-28 07:20:36	0|gmaxwell|(keep in mind we're limited to use approaches which attackers have limited ability to influence)
 70 2017-08-28 07:21:00	0|kallewoof|Does it not look at mempool for >1 conf case? I didn't see any conditionals about that.
 71 2017-08-28 07:21:18	0|gmaxwell|e.g. you could look at the mempool right now and see what would get you in... assuming your mempool was current this would work, until there was some softfork or transaction censorship your node didn't know about, and in that case an attacker could make you think 100BTC fees weren't making it in...
 72 2017-08-28 07:21:23	0|sipa|it only looks at how long mempool txn take to confirm
 73 2017-08-28 07:21:42	0|sipa|it doesn't look at the composition of the mempool itself, nor the composition of blocks itself
 74 2017-08-28 07:21:47	0|gmaxwell|unconfirmed txn don't figure into its reasoning because of those influence issues.
 75 2017-08-28 07:23:08	0|kallewoof|Would a "use mempool to optimize fee" option in the fee estimator make sense? It would only ever lower the fee and it would use the mempool to figure out where approximately to place the fee to get into the bottom 10%.
 76 2017-08-28 07:23:44	0|kallewoof|Maybe it would require or default-on rbf to give you a way out if it gets stuck..
 77 2017-08-28 07:23:58	0|wumpus|luke-jr: #7339 seems a mess to me; no one in practice will want to build without libevent support; it will create exactly the same user confusion as #10826  "oh I can build without boost?" except there isn't even the excuse that it will be better in the future
 78 2017-08-28 07:24:04	0|gmaxwell|Esp if RBF is in use and your mempool is in sync, bidding directly against it is a great approach.  But we haven't figured out how to make it safe (if it's even possible).. though it could be used to only lower the estimates vs the current approach. I think we mostly don't do that now because RBF support is new, and really won't be fully complete until after we've switched the wallet to segwit (
 79 2017-08-28 07:24:10	0|gmaxwell|because some of the bumping corner cases are not reasonable to solve in the presence of malleability)
 80 2017-08-28 07:24:18	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: jinx.
 81 2017-08-28 07:24:39	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: yes, I think it would, if it only lowers, and if RBF is in use... and if the bumping is a bit more effective than what we have now.
 82 2017-08-28 07:25:19	0|gmaxwell|though we may also need to complete mempool sync to get useful enough data shortly after startup. :(  oh well it would still be useful if it wasn't available all the time.
 83 2017-08-28 07:25:20	0|wumpus|luke-jr: and it does add yet another configuration combination to test
 84 2017-08-28 07:25:41	0|kallewoof|Okay! Thanks for the feedback. :) I will look into that for sure.
 85 2017-08-28 07:28:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ede386c2193f...6ca15136246c
 86 2017-08-28 07:28:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148897b1b 15MeshCollider: Add meshcollider gitian key
 87 2017-08-28 07:28:17	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146ca1513 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11153: Add meshcollider Gitian PGP key...
 88 2017-08-28 07:29:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11153: Add meshcollider Gitian PGP key (06master...06201708_add_meshcollider_gpg) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11153
 89 2017-08-28 07:35:31	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e254830 15Andrew Chow: Make tabs toolbar no longer have a context menu...
 90 2017-08-28 07:35:31	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6ca15136246c...5b8af7b87913
 91 2017-08-28 07:35:32	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145b8af7b 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11169: [GUI] Make tabs toolbar no longer have a context menu...
 92 2017-08-28 07:36:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11169: [GUI] Make tabs toolbar no longer have a context menu (06master...06rm-hide-tabs) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11169
 93 2017-08-28 07:40:41	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1482dd719 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: rpc: Write authcookie atomically...
 94 2017-08-28 07:40:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5b8af7b87913...c7229ac36e36
 95 2017-08-28 07:40:42	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c7229ac 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11131: rpc: Write authcookie atomically...
 96 2017-08-28 07:41:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11131: rpc: Write authcookie atomically (06master...062017_08_atomic_cookie) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11131
 97 2017-08-28 07:42:26	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e40fa98 15danra: Simplify bswap_16 implementation...
 98 2017-08-28 07:42:26	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c7229ac36e36...298251161c7b
 99 2017-08-28 07:42:27	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142982511 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11138: Compat: Simplify bswap_16 implementation...
100 2017-08-28 07:43:04	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11138: Compat: Simplify bswap_16 implementation (06master...06patch-2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11138
101 2017-08-28 07:44:15	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b426e24 15Dan Raviv: Remove redundant explicitly defined copy ctors...
102 2017-08-28 07:44:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/298251161c7b...745bbdc189b2
103 2017-08-28 07:44:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14745bbdc 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11161: Remove redundant explicitly defined copy ctors...
104 2017-08-28 07:44:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11161: Remove redundant explicitly defined copy ctors (06master...06fix/redundant-CFeeRate-copy-ctor) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11161
105 2017-08-28 07:55:52	0|wumpus|so another rc necessary for 0.15.0?
106 2017-08-28 07:56:38	0|gmaxwell|I don't personally think another RC is needed but I think the project uses a higher standard than I do.
107 2017-08-28 07:58:24	0|wumpus|if we do it makes sense to tag it today, at least, so it's hopefully gitian-built and I can upload the executables before I leave for SF
108 2017-08-28 07:59:03	0|wumpus|if we don't, the same applies for -final I guess
109 2017-08-28 08:00:55	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 140a6af47 15MarcoFalke: [doc] build-windows: Mention that only trusty works...
110 2017-08-28 08:00:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 060.15: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/0a6af47ffabbeee29fec5b5d71eaff43a08969da
111 2017-08-28 08:02:49	0|wumpus|if we do nothing right now, we'll be stuck with rc2 for the next two weeks and a rc3 to posssibly be done after that
112 2017-08-28 08:06:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/745bbdc189b2...9c833f471c14
113 2017-08-28 08:06:30	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146af49dd 15Alex Morcos: Output a bit more information for fee calculation report.
114 2017-08-28 08:06:30	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a54c7b9 15Alex Morcos: Fix rounding errors in calculation of minimum change size
115 2017-08-28 08:06:31	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149c833f4 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11145: Fix rounding bug in calculation of minimum change...
116 2017-08-28 08:07:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11145: Fix rounding bug in calculation of minimum change (06master...06fixrounding) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11145
117 2017-08-28 08:07:30	0|wumpus|anyhow I"m open to ideas, I'll not be on IRC a lot today and tomorrow (packing etc) but if we want to tag something we need to do it soon
118 2017-08-28 08:08:31	0|gmaxwell|well, morcos fix needs to be merged in 0.15 branch. it applied cleanly for me and thats what I was testing on (0.15+it)
119 2017-08-28 08:08:46	0|wumpus|yes, but for 0.15.0 or 0.15.1?
120 2017-08-28 08:08:56	0|wumpus|obviously it needs to go into some 0.15 release
121 2017-08-28 08:09:04	0|sipa|#11145 is a crashing bugfix
122 2017-08-28 08:09:22	0|sipa|i think it needs to be in 0.15.0
123 2017-08-28 08:09:47	0|wumpus|ok
124 2017-08-28 08:10:00	0|wumpus|so merge it into 0.15 and do a rc3 now?
125 2017-08-28 08:10:08	0|sipa|sgtm
126 2017-08-28 08:10:20	0|gmaxwell|ACK..
127 2017-08-28 08:10:51	0|gmaxwell|This will put the release on what day most likely?
128 2017-08-28 08:11:11	0|gmaxwell|(asking for my slides, I'm doing a presentation on 0.15 tomorrow)
129 2017-08-28 08:11:11	0|wumpus|sept 14/15
130 2017-08-28 08:11:38	0|wumpus|given that we don't need to do another rc, of course
131 2017-08-28 08:13:39	0|wumpus|I never expected this to slip so far
132 2017-08-28 08:14:31	0|wumpus|let's do 0.15 quickly, they say, we need it soon,...
133 2017-08-28 08:15:59	0|gmaxwell|this slip is due to a regression bug at least, we would have made the announced schedule but for it.
134 2017-08-28 08:16:04	0|gmaxwell|so I think thats pretty good.
135 2017-08-28 08:16:48	0|wumpus|it's too early to say
136 2017-08-28 08:16:56	0|gmaxwell|it's not like sse4 sha2 or something we did at the last minute is biting us, and the change that introduced this bug itself fixed an important issue.
137 2017-08-28 08:17:05	0|gmaxwell|well yes, but given what we know now.
138 2017-08-28 08:18:24	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 14e51bb71 15Alex Morcos: Fix rounding errors in calculation of minimum change size...
139 2017-08-28 08:18:24	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 060.15: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0a6af47ffabb...5b059a833eb5
140 2017-08-28 08:18:25	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 145b059a8 15Alex Morcos: Output a bit more information for fee calculation report....
141 2017-08-28 08:19:32	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 060.15: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e8ad101e5b104ca913beb82a77f5b3bfa1a7c5f6
142 2017-08-28 08:19:33	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 14e8ad101 15Matt Corallo: Changing -txindex requires -reindex, not -reindex-chainstate...
143 2017-08-28 08:23:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11149: Use prefix instead of postfix increment/decrement for non-trivial typ… (06master...06prefix-increment) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11149
144 2017-08-28 08:29:50	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 1429a3cb2 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Translation update pre-rc3...
145 2017-08-28 08:29:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 060.15: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/29a3cb237802a6f240def54cbc74cb2d5375683a
146 2017-08-28 08:32:04	0|wumpus|isn't opening two issues just for release notes items a bit much?
147 2017-08-28 08:33:07	0|sipa|wumpus: oh, right
148 2017-08-28 08:33:35	0|sipa|sure, i can add things there; just wasn't sure if we'd still look at the existing one
149 2017-08-28 08:33:50	0|wumpus|need to reopen it at least
150 2017-08-28 08:34:19	0|wumpus|well I'd say posting there will bring it to attention of more people than creating an ew issue
151 2017-08-28 08:38:18	0|wumpus|anyhow  * [new tag]         v0.15.0rc3 -> v0.15.0rc3
152 2017-08-28 08:39:44	0|kallewoof|Just to clarify, there's no code that prioritizes transactions based on lifetime anymore, right? I.e. the higher fee from a longer confirmation window is simply based on probability
153 2017-08-28 08:39:53	0|kallewoof|Er, lower fee I meant
154 2017-08-28 08:41:09	0|wumpus|yes. Though: the 'priority' code didn't prioritize based on transaction lifetime, but lifetime of the input utxos
155 2017-08-28 08:41:31	0|kallewoof|Ah, right, I knew that.
156 2017-08-28 08:57:11	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14de9a1db 15Russell Yanofsky: Acquire cs_main lock before cs_wallet during wallet initialization...
157 2017-08-28 08:57:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9c833f471c14...df91e11ae1e9
158 2017-08-28 08:57:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14df91e11 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11126: Acquire cs_main lock before cs_wallet during wallet initialization...
159 2017-08-28 08:57:51	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11126: Acquire cs_main lock before cs_wallet during wallet initialization (06master...06pr/loadlock2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11126
160 2017-08-28 09:06:01	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #11176: build: Rename --enable-experimental-asm to --enable-asm and enable by default (06master...062017_08_non_experimental_asm) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11176
161 2017-08-28 09:06:42	0|gmaxwell|wumpus: ^ thanks, would have done myself but was busy.
162 2017-08-28 09:07:40	0|wumpus|np, I hope I got the build system stuff right
163 2017-08-28 10:15:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/df91e11ae1e9...f088a1bb392e
164 2017-08-28 10:15:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145f850b0 15Karl-Johan Alm: [bench] Include ms/blk stats in Connect* benchmarks.
165 2017-08-28 10:15:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a473eff 15Karl-Johan Alm: [bench] Replace 0.00(000)1 with MICRO/MILLI #defines in validation.cpp.
166 2017-08-28 10:15:14	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f088a1b 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10303: [bench] Include ms/blk stats in Connect* benchmarks....
167 2017-08-28 10:15:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10303: [bench] Include ms/blk stats in Connect* benchmarks. (06master...06bench-add-per-block-stats) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10303
168 2017-08-28 10:18:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15rawodb opened pull request #11177: Support for SegWit Addresses in RPC  calls (06master...06pr/rpc_getsegwitaddresses) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11177
169 2017-08-28 10:43:11	0|kallewoof|Accidentally posted in #bitcoin-dev instead of here, but I got some initial mempool optimizing code for fee estimation in place that looks promising. Will check back when I have more profiling done.
170 2017-08-28 10:45:03	0|kallewoof|Avg 2953 sat/k/tx overshoot seems useful for sure, compared to 370542 (conservative) or 116949 (non-conservative).
171 2017-08-28 11:01:14	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MeshCollider opened pull request #11178: Add iswitness parameter to decode- and fundrawtransaction RPCs (06master...06201708_rawtx_bool) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11178
172 2017-08-28 11:52:11	0|instagibbs|kallewoof, is this for mempool-based sniping?
173 2017-08-28 11:55:05	0|kallewoof|instagibbs: not sure what you mean by sniping, but it uses mempool to optimize fees
174 2017-08-28 12:26:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #11179: rpc: Push down safe mode checks (06master...062017_08_safemode_pushdown) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11179
175 2017-08-28 14:00:39	0|fanquake|wumpus will you be uploading the sigs for the signed build shortly?
176 2017-08-28 14:15:21	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11172: Fixed a grammar issue. (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11172
177 2017-08-28 14:40:46	0|kallewoof|wumpus: I may be mixing things up, but was this not changed in a recent merge (or was it a not-merged-yet PR?): "SHA256 hashing has been optimized for architectures supporting SSE 4 (See PR 10182). SHA256 is around 50% faster on supported hardware, which results in around 5% faster IBD and block validation. In version 0.15, SHA256 hardware optimization is disabled in release builds by default, but
178 2017-08-28 14:40:47	0|kallewoof|can be enabled by using --enable-experimental-asm when building.
179 2017-08-28 14:40:54	0|kallewoof|" (from release notes in 0.15)
180 2017-08-28 14:41:37	0|kallewoof|Oh it's a few lines up. I'll add a note to that PR about the release notes in case it's meant for 0.15
181 2017-08-28 14:42:45	0|wumpus|fanquake: I can't do that
182 2017-08-28 14:43:41	0|wumpus|kallewoof: that release note is correct for 0.15
183 2017-08-28 14:43:50	0|wumpus|after 0.15 we'll enable the asm by default
184 2017-08-28 14:44:23	0|promag|wumpus: will you submit a patch to add the runtime flag?
185 2017-08-28 14:44:28	0|kallewoof|Gotcha
186 2017-08-28 14:44:30	0|wumpus|what runtime flag?
187 2017-08-28 14:44:48	0|promag|to enable/disable sha256 asm
188 2017-08-28 14:45:04	0|wumpus|oh no, I'm not going to do that
189 2017-08-28 14:45:31	0|promag|but do you think is really useful?
190 2017-08-28 14:45:47	0|wumpus|no, it wouldn't be useful for me, my point was that *if* user switching of the sha256 method should be possible it should be at run time
191 2017-08-28 14:46:39	0|promag|ok, agree
192 2017-08-28 14:46:59	0|kallewoof|"This can be useful if running a pruned node, since loading a wallet where the most recent sync is beyond the pruned height results in having to download and revalidate the whole blockchain." << Really? Not just the blocks starting at the wallet's last sync point?
193 2017-08-28 14:47:03	0|wumpus|when there are a lot of different ones it might be useful to be able to switch for benchmarking, on the other hand 'bench_bitcoin' should likely just test them al
194 2017-08-28 14:47:12	0|wumpus|no need for user involvement
195 2017-08-28 14:47:15	0|kallewoof|(^ for multi wallets in QT being synced even tho only one is shown)
196 2017-08-28 14:49:08	0|wumpus|kallewoof: I think 'beyond' is confusing there, isn't 'before' meant?
197 2017-08-28 14:49:10	0|promag|wumpus: I thought the same regarding benchmarking
198 2017-08-28 14:49:59	0|wumpus|kallewoof: if the block at time of the last sync of a wallet was pruned, it re-fetches everything
199 2017-08-28 14:50:26	0|kallewoof|Maybe English is failing me. It sounds to me like it has to redownload everything from genesis if a wallet happens to not have been synced for the last (blocks remaining afte pruning) + 1 blocks.
200 2017-08-28 14:50:39	0|wumpus|that's what it does, yes
201 2017-08-28 14:50:53	0|kallewoof|Oh... kay.
202 2017-08-28 14:50:59	0|wumpus|it would be possible to download only a subset of the blocks, but that never happens
203 2017-08-28 14:51:14	0|kallewoof|Maybe wallet.dat files should have an age :)
204 2017-08-28 14:56:07	0|kallewoof|Btw I've been meaning to mention this. Kalle Alm = Karl-Johan Alm for the release notes. Didn't feel important enough to bring up but I saw someone make a PR to fix names before.
205 2017-08-28 14:56:53	0|wumpus|feel free to submit a PR to fix it
206 2017-08-28 14:59:15	0|kallewoof|Sure thing. Since someone was doing it for a group of people I was sort of wondering if there was a place where this was written down.
207 2017-08-28 14:59:43	0|wumpus|there was an editing phase on the wiki, but now it's been merged back to the branch
208 2017-08-28 15:01:32	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #11180: [release-notes.md] Remove alias (060.15...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11180
209 2017-08-28 15:05:53	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 14a461cf4 15kallewoof: Update release-notes.md
210 2017-08-28 15:05:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 060.15: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/29a3cb237802...48790e0efaf4
211 2017-08-28 15:05:54	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.15 1448790e0 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11180: [release-notes.md] Remove alias...
212 2017-08-28 15:58:08	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14eefc2f3 15danra: Move local include to before system includes...
213 2017-08-28 15:58:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f088a1bb392e...cee4fe1d53b2
214 2017-08-28 15:58:09	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cee4fe1 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11144: Move local include to before system includes...
215 2017-08-28 15:58:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11144: Move local include to before system includes (06master...06patch-6) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11144
216 2017-08-28 16:12:42	0|sc|hi there!
217 2017-08-28 16:13:44	0|Guest89941|Does anyone know how to keep mining reward constant in regtest for quite a long period of time? It halves very fast for my purposes
218 2017-08-28 16:44:21	0|MarcoFalke|s_c: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8623/files#diff-64cbe1ad5465e13bc59ee8bb6f3de2e7R243
219 2017-08-28 16:45:52	0|s_c|MarcoFalke, thank you!
220 2017-08-28 17:22:03	0|luke-jr|wumpus: I see your point
221 2017-08-28 18:20:21	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #11182: [tests] Add P2P interface to TestNode (06master...06test_node_p2p) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11182
222 2017-08-28 19:09:58	0|wall__|Hello
223 2017-08-28 19:10:09	0|wall__|How to get bitcoin wallet ?
224 2017-08-28 19:11:42	0|sipa|wall__: #bitcoin, and https://bitcoin.org/en/getting-started
225 2017-08-28 19:13:47	0|wall__|Sipa : i still confussed   with sofware this
226 2017-08-28 19:14:08	0|wall__|Can you help me
227 2017-08-28 19:15:10	0|sipa|wall__: off topic here, this is a development channel. use #bitcoin
228 2017-08-28 19:16:05	0|wall__|Oh ok
229 2017-08-28 19:17:06	0|wall__|How to see log in bitcoin core
230 2017-08-28 19:17:30	0|sipa|#bitcoin
231 2017-08-28 19:18:38	0|wall__|Ok thx
232 2017-08-28 19:54:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15rawodb closed pull request #11170: Add label support to "addwitnessaddress" (06master...06pr/rpc_addwitnessaddress) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11170
233 2017-08-28 20:30:49	0|cfields|gitian builders: v0.15.0rc3 detached sigs are pushed
234 2017-08-28 20:57:19	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 7 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/cee4fe1d53b2...60dd9cc47058
235 2017-08-28 20:57:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1425cd520 15practicalswift: Use sys.exit(...) instead of exit(...): exit(...) should not be used in programs
236 2017-08-28 20:57:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1451cb6b8 15practicalswift: Use print(...) instead of undefined printf(...)
237 2017-08-28 20:57:21	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149b94054 15practicalswift: Avoid reference to undefined name: stderr does not exist, sys.stderr does
238 2017-08-28 20:57:44	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #10781: Python cleanups (06master...06python-cleanups) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10781
239 2017-08-28 21:30:02	0|maaku|I added a new opcode to script/interpreter.cpp that uses data serialization, and on 0.15 (but not prior) I get a compilation error because memory_cleanse can't be found when linking bitcoinconsensus. Is it intentional that this support function is excluded from libbitcoinconsensus?
240 2017-08-28 21:33:25	0|sipa|maaku: i don't see why it should be excluded from libbitcoinconsensus
241 2017-08-28 21:50:02	0|maaku|sipa: hrm. that would require linking against ssl
242 2017-08-28 21:50:46	0|sipa|maaku: ugh, we need to replace that function with something non-openssl then
243 2017-08-28 21:50:55	0|sipa|the openssl implementation is braindead anyway
244 2017-08-28 23:07:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15dooglus opened pull request #11184: Use IsMine() to check whether we own the custom change address... (060.15...06change_ismine_0.15) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11184
245 2017-08-28 23:13:36	0|luke-jr|sipa: any particular reason you left off BIP 143 on https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/579 ?
246 2017-08-28 23:26:36	0|meshcollider|With BIP 143 I did also check the spelling of CODESEPARATOR was consistent with script.cpp btw, in case that was the issue
247 2017-08-28 23:49:25	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146d2d2eb 15Jorge Timón: RPC: gettxout: Slightly improve doc and tests
248 2017-08-28 23:49:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/60dd9cc47058...91e49c51f1ae
249 2017-08-28 23:49:26	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1491e49c5 15MarcoFalke: Merge #10859: RPC: gettxout: Slightly improve doc and tests...
250 2017-08-28 23:49:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #10859: RPC: gettxout: Slightly improve doc and tests (06master...06b15-rpc-gettxout-mempool) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10859