1 2017-12-06 00:00:19	0|sipa|-u
  2 2017-12-06 01:56:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #11637: WIP: Remove dead service bits code (06master...06Mf1711-p2pDead) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11637
  3 2017-12-06 07:10:10	0|jonasschnelli|I think #10275 is ready for merge (wumpus)
  4 2017-12-06 07:10:14	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10275 | [rpc] Allow fetching tx directly from specified block in getrawtransaction by kallewoof · Pull Request #10275 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  5 2017-12-06 07:16:58	0|jonasschnelli|BlueMatt: you wrote: "ReadBlockFromDisk requires cs_main" in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11281/files#r154681446
  6 2017-12-06 07:17:01	0|jonasschnelli|I think it doesn't
  7 2017-12-06 07:25:14	0|gurjeet|hi
  8 2017-12-06 07:26:24	0|gurjeet|I am looking bitcoin developer tatorial how i can setup bitcoin exchange
  9 2017-12-06 07:26:47	0|gurjeet|can any body advise me
 10 2017-12-06 07:27:23	0|meshcollider|gurjeet: you should probably take this to #bitcoin not here
 11 2017-12-06 07:28:38	0|gurjeet|thanks
 12 2017-12-06 07:43:28	0|jonasschnelli|Has anyone experimented with Jetson TX1 (NVIDIA) and Bitcoin Core?
 13 2017-12-06 08:14:24	0|kabaum|Why are the sequence of other inputs zeroed when signing an input with SIGHASH_NONE or SIGHASH_SINGLE?
 14 2017-12-06 08:35:21	0|GAit|jonasschnelli: isnt the jetson just some arm board with some reasonably powerful gpu for opencl/cuda? most use cases ive seen involved opencv
 15 2017-12-06 08:38:30	0|jonasschnelli|GAit: it's just a SOC. You either need the dev kit or your custom ext.
 16 2017-12-06 08:38:48	0|jonasschnelli|GAit: The GPU power would go pretty much unused for a full node.
 17 2017-12-06 08:39:20	0|jonasschnelli|GAit: but the CPU, SATA feature and memory would make it a good choice for a full node in a bbox
 18 2017-12-06 08:40:24	0|jonasschnelli|But a custom board with LAN, I2C for a little b/w screen, SATA/SSD, etc. would something that would have to been built
 19 2017-12-06 08:50:03	0|GAit|jonasschnelli: maybe lemaker banana pro, has eth, has sata, doesn't have the powerful gpu but we don't need that. Otherwise x86 the apu2c4 isn't too bad (maybe a bit old nowdays)
 20 2017-12-06 08:52:36	0|GAit|non that many boards out there with sata and decent amounts of ram unfortunately
 21 2017-12-06 11:05:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146d2f277 15Henrik Jonsson: rpcuser.py: Use 'python' not 'python2'
 22 2017-12-06 11:05:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5bea05bc1d17...a13e44385147
 23 2017-12-06 11:05:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a13e443 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11830: rpcuser.py: Use 'python' not 'python2'...
 24 2017-12-06 11:05:49	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11830: rpcuser.py: Use 'python' not 'python2' (06master...06rpcuser-py) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11830
 25 2017-12-06 11:10:09	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: thanks, agreed
 26 2017-12-06 11:11:02	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a13e44385147...497d0e014cc7
 27 2017-12-06 11:11:03	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a5f5a2c 15Karl-Johan Alm: [rpc] Fix fVerbose parsing (remove excess if cases).
 28 2017-12-06 11:11:03	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b167951 15Karl-Johan Alm: [rpc] Allow getrawtransaction to take optional blockhash to fetch transaction from a block directly.
 29 2017-12-06 11:11:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14434526a 15Karl-Johan Alm: [test] Add tests for getrawtransaction with block hash.
 30 2017-12-06 11:20:05	0|promag|wumpus: yes, there are a couple of early returns taht
 31 2017-12-06 11:20:27	0|promag|that happen when there is an interrupt
 32 2017-12-06 11:20:39	0|promag|or something fails
 33 2017-12-06 11:21:58	0|wumpus|promag: strange, maybe the !.. is inherited from the time when that was not the case, otherwise it makes kind of little sense. Though I'm surprised that it causes a crash.
 34 2017-12-06 11:22:17	0|promag|actually fRequestShutdown is checked multiple times while the block index is loaded
 35 2017-12-06 11:22:41	0|wumpus|ideally returning false, even at the end of the init process, should not cause a crash. But if this works around it, fine.\
 36 2017-12-06 11:22:50	0|wumpus|yes it should be
 37 2017-12-06 11:22:57	0|meshcollider|self-reminder i think we should discuss the config file situation at the meeting tomorrow, re https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11829#issuecomment-349610380
 38 2017-12-06 11:22:57	0|promag|crash aside, i think at that point it should return true
 39 2017-12-06 11:23:06	0|wumpus|it should check that flag at any time that the process is interruptible
 40 2017-12-06 11:23:16	0|wumpus|meshcollider: yep
 41 2017-12-06 11:23:55	0|promag|wumpus: right, at that point it's not interruptible
 42 2017-12-06 11:24:07	0|wumpus|promag: agree
 43 2017-12-06 11:33:32	0|wumpus|GAit: jonasschnelli: indeed, it seems any reasonably modern ARM board, even with a USB stick or SD card for storage, can keep up with the chain once it's synchronized. Additional i/o and CPU speed will contribute to the initial sync, and when catching up after it's been off.
 44 2017-12-06 11:37:02	0|wumpus|(as well as towards serving blocks to others if you want that)
 45 2017-12-06 11:40:46	0|Sentineo|yeah I am running a full node on an odroid for 7 months now
 46 2017-12-06 11:41:05	0|Sentineo|and mainly the assembler optimisation helps a lot
 47 2017-12-06 11:46:04	0|wumpus|we should probably consider making the assembly optimization be the default on ARM
 48 2017-12-06 11:56:44	0|CubicEarth|sat/byte seems to have become the default way people talk about fees. What about we changing the fee selector / estimator in core to display fees in those same terms?
 49 2017-12-06 12:04:17	0|wumpus|that's just a factor 100, right?
 50 2017-12-06 12:12:07	0|CubicEarth|from the 'recommended' selector, yes, factor of 100.
 51 2017-12-06 12:12:51	0|CubicEarth|For the custom part, there is no 'satoshi' option, and there is no 'byte' option
 52 2017-12-06 12:13:27	0|wumpus|were it to be redesigned from scratch I'd agree with you. I think changing it now is too dangerous.
 53 2017-12-06 12:14:28	0|wumpus|for the RPC interface people already have software that uses the current convention, for the GUI people already have the habit of entering /kb numbers, it's kind of a fight upstream to change it
 54 2017-12-06 12:14:30	0|CubicEarth|because of confusion from the change?
 55 2017-12-06 12:14:39	0|wumpus|yes
 56 2017-12-06 12:23:15	0|wumpus|I do agree that for new users it would be less confusing
 57 2017-12-06 12:24:54	0|CubicEarth|Well, perhaps just some addition information beside what is given.      1.24291 mBTC/kB  (124.291 satoshis/byte)
 58 2017-12-06 12:25:16	0|CubicEarth|It's the double conversion that makes it 'harder'
 59 2017-12-06 12:26:18	0|wumpus|that's ok with me
 60 2017-12-06 12:28:28	0|CubicEarth|giving the extra information?
 61 2017-12-06 12:30:25	0|Sentineo|yeah a conversion info would be enough I think - better than no option
 62 2017-12-06 12:30:51	0|Sentineo|and wumpus yeah, making the asm optimisation on arm the default would be cool. It realy make noticable difference.
 63 2017-12-06 12:30:57	0|wumpus|CubicEarth: yes
 64 2017-12-06 12:33:22	0|CubicEarth|Cool! I'll see if I can follow the proper protocol on github to make the idea legit
 65 2017-12-06 12:35:05	0|wumpus|I don't personally think at least that adding the information in another unit and mentioning that unit will cause confusion. The danger is mostly when entering fees (e.g. the custom fee).
 66 2017-12-06 12:42:36	0|luke-jr|can anyone think of a reason that might cause block=00000000000000000961eb789c07cc05be9609821e9c3e5bcc4094c332a22d4f  height=383488  log2_work=83.598077  date=2015-11-14 06:58:23 to be rejected for missing/spent inputs? :/
 67 2017-12-06 12:54:18	0|wumpus|weird? corrupted database? has 114442 confirmations so it's safe to say it should be valid
 68 2017-12-06 12:55:41	0|luke-jr|yeah. user says he's having problems syncing on two different machines (TBD if it's the same height)
 69 2017-12-06 12:56:10	0|wumpus|the only thing I can think of is either a corruption that happens to have excised that record (maybe in the bloom filter portion of the leveldb file?), or that it somehow was missed while writing to disk
 70 2017-12-06 12:57:16	0|CubicEarth|Did they sync directly from one machine to the other?
 71 2017-12-06 12:57:19	0|wumpus|or miscellaneous problems caused by malfunctioning hardware, though I'd usually expect a CRC error first
 72 2017-12-06 12:57:30	0|luke-jr|CubicEarth: not sure, but that shouldn't matter
 73 2017-12-06 12:58:10	0|wumpus|what version of bitcoin core?
 74 2017-12-06 12:58:52	0|luke-jr|v0.14.0.0-46952c8-dirty apparently; wtf, why?
 75 2017-12-06 13:00:05	0|luke-jr|he said new install, so I assumed latest.. guess I should tell him to try that
 76 2017-12-06 13:00:49	0|wumpus|the 'dirty' part worries me
 77 2017-12-06 13:01:09	0|wumpus|also that commit is not part of our repo
 78 2017-12-06 13:01:24	0|wumpus|maybe knots?
 79 2017-12-06 13:01:30	0|luke-jr|yeah, looks like it's Knots 0.14.0
 80 2017-12-06 13:01:34	0|luke-jr|still old either way
 81 2017-12-06 13:02:10	0|Sentineo|are the leveldb keys documented somewhere? Having hard time to find it.
 82 2017-12-06 13:02:25	0|wumpus|leveldb *keys*?
 83 2017-12-06 13:02:26	0|Sentineo|for the chainstate
 84 2017-12-06 13:02:36	0|wumpus|ohh that kind of keys
 85 2017-12-06 13:02:41	0|luke-jr|Sentineo: txdb.cpp
 86 2017-12-06 13:03:54	0|wumpus|right, that one has all the (de)serialization logic and prefixes
 87 2017-12-06 13:04:41	0|Sentineo|ah cool!
 88 2017-12-06 13:04:46	0|Sentineo|thanks
 89 2017-12-06 13:06:29	0|wumpus|if you're trying to write external troubleshooting code in python this might be of help: https://github.com/laanwj/blockdb-troubleshoot   Though currently there's nothing for chainstate in there, just block indexes.
 90 2017-12-06 13:07:06	0|wumpus|but it builds a leveldb python module that can be used to inspect bitcoind's files without making it incompatible, as most system leveldbs would do
 91 2017-12-06 13:10:10	0|Provoostenator|CubicEarth: #11564 (I'll link to the above chat there)
 92 2017-12-06 13:10:11	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11564 | [Qt] display fees in Sat / vByte instead of (μ/m)BTC/kB · Issue #11564 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 93 2017-12-06 13:11:51	0|wumpus|oh we already had an issue open for that, thanks Provoostenator
 94 2017-12-06 13:12:16	0|Sentineo|ah even better, I am trying to understand how the db is set up, I would like to extract the fees only somehow. Right now I have an app that shows fees in real time and it kills my odroid. So I will have to create a separate db just to get the fees, as it creates too much stress on the system to RPC all inputs and compute the fee.
 95 2017-12-06 13:12:34	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15hkjn opened pull request #11836: Rename rpcuser.py to rpcauth.py (06master...06rename-rpcuser) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11836
 96 2017-12-06 13:13:08	0|wumpus|be aware that the databases are not an interface, the format might change at any time, so please don't parse them in a production app
 97 2017-12-06 13:13:32	0|Sentineo|not a production app, just a learning tool
 98 2017-12-06 13:13:36	0|Sentineo|but goot to know
 99 2017-12-06 13:13:38	0|wumpus|then it's fine
100 2017-12-06 13:13:59	0|Sentineo|RPCing would take ages, but is much safer, agree
101 2017-12-06 13:14:28	0|wumpus|RPC batching helps if you need to do a lot of queries
102 2017-12-06 13:15:33	0|wumpus|if you really need the whole utxo set, well I tried adding functionality for that once in #7759, but streaming safely seems impossible with the current http server
103 2017-12-06 13:15:35	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7759 | [WIP] rest: Stream entire utxo set by laanwj · Pull Request #7759 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
104 2017-12-06 13:18:50	0|wumpus|it worked more or less but there were strange intermittent issues, such as timeout while streaming
105 2017-12-06 13:33:04	0|hkjn0|re: assembler optimization for ARM, where would I find info on enabling this?
106 2017-12-06 13:33:27	0|hkjn0|I have a full node on baremetal armv7l, it managed to catch up on IBD eventually, but might be useful for future reference..
107 2017-12-06 13:34:49	0|Sentineo|hkjn0: I have it saved, just a sec ... let me find it
108 2017-12-06 13:35:48	0|Sentineo|hkjn0: build it with ./configure --with-asm=arm --enable-experimental
109 2017-12-06 13:36:27	0|wumpus|that should be it ^
110 2017-12-06 13:39:56	0|Sentineo|I could not find a documentation of it, but if you check https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/blob/master/configure.ac#L151 it is there
111 2017-12-06 13:43:47	0|hkjn0|thanks Sentineo, I'll give it a whirl
112 2017-12-06 13:45:23	0|wumpus|the only documentation of it is in ./configure. secp256's configure at that, not bitcoin's.
113 2017-12-06 13:51:01	0|hkjn0|hm, right. so I guess that L1289-1290 in bitcoin's configure.ac would be where to pass through the config flags to secp256k1: AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS([src/secp256k1])
114 2017-12-06 13:51:57	0|wumpus|yes
115 2017-12-06 13:52:10	0|wumpus|I also discovered that by accident, FWIW
116 2017-12-06 13:52:54	0|wumpus|would make sense to document it somewhere though I'm not sure where
117 2017-12-06 13:57:41	0|hkjn0|yeah, I am new to some of these tools myself, but the wiring of automake/autoconf with several different projects is definitely not trivial
118 2017-12-06 14:08:36	0|wumpus|aj: we might do completely away with the priority labels, I don't anyone is using them for anything in practice
119 2017-12-06 14:09:25	0|wumpus|priorities really only make sense if they're discussed weekly in the meeting, and we already have a 'high priority for review' project which is what someone should be looking for if they want to do something high priority
120 2017-12-06 14:15:16	0|aj|wumpus: makes sense
121 2017-12-06 14:15:45	0|BlueMatt|jonasschnelli: there are two ReadBlockFromDisk's - one requires cs_main to read non-const CBlockIndex fields, one does not
122 2017-12-06 14:16:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11741: Add -logdir option to control where debug.log lives (06master...06logdir) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11741
123 2017-12-06 14:30:04	0|BlueMatt|jonasschnelli: most obvious cs_main-needing-bit: GetBlockPos reads CBlockIndex.nChainState
124 2017-12-06 15:36:57	0|Provoostenator|I'm trying to figure out why the segwit QT wallet in #11403 doesn't show a popup when it receives a transaction.
125 2017-12-06 15:37:03	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
126 2017-12-06 15:37:23	0|Provoostenator|It should happen somewhere around here, is a row is inserted in the transaction table model: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/e2e9ead25fe0ddb364e35f8eabb5a7f937d3973b/src/qt/walletview.cpp#L140
127 2017-12-06 15:38:06	0|Provoostenator|The transaction does show up on the Transactions screen and Overview screen. I'm assuming they use the same table, but assuming stuff is generally a bad idea :-)
128 2017-12-06 15:38:53	0|Provoostenator|What's a good practice for adding debug log statements to this area of the code?
129 2017-12-06 15:51:04	0|Provoostenator|Receiving funds on a legacy (testnet) address doesn't trigger a notification either.
130 2017-12-06 15:55:03	0|Provoostenator|Instagibs: I wonder if this is related to the pending balance issues
131 2017-12-06 15:55:11	0|instagibbs|might be
132 2017-12-06 15:55:25	0|instagibbs|I'm seeing issues too
133 2017-12-06 15:55:33	0|Provoostenator|Maybe a transaction not getting fully commited to a db?
134 2017-12-06 15:55:36	0|instagibbs|it's entering mempool but not being applied to balance, randomly
135 2017-12-06 15:55:40	0|instagibbs|I don't think so
136 2017-12-06 15:55:40	0|Provoostenator|Or some flushing thing.
137 2017-12-06 15:55:56	0|instagibbs|my guess is the p2sh stuff is tripping up ISMINE logic somewhere
138 2017-12-06 15:56:52	0|instagibbs|confirming it makes it stick, which means it's some mempool/unconfirmed interaction
139 2017-12-06 15:56:55	0|Provoostenator|IsMine is done at the wallet level right? So are you able to produce these issues with just RPC?
140 2017-12-06 15:57:00	0|instagibbs|yep
141 2017-12-06 15:57:16	0|Provoostenator|Ok, that narrows is down a lot
142 2017-12-06 15:57:47	0|instagibbs|ok, I just sent confirmed coins from p2sh to p2sh, stopped, restarted, it's gone
143 2017-12-06 15:57:58	0|instagibbs|easy to reproduce here
144 2017-12-06 15:58:10	0|instagibbs|2017-12-06 15:57:30 Imported mempool transactions from disk: 1 succeeded, 0 failed, 0 expired, 0 already there
145 2017-12-06 15:58:18	0|instagibbs|so it hits mempool, yet wallet is barfing
146 2017-12-06 15:58:31	0|Provoostenator|"gone" means the bug is gone?
147 2017-12-06 15:58:42	0|instagibbs|no, funds are gone from unconfirmed or confirmed
148 2017-12-06 15:58:55	0|instagibbs|i believe they should be considered confirmed, since they're from yourself
149 2017-12-06 16:00:11	0|Provoostenator|I think so too. I'm recompiling master now, but when I tried that a few days ago on master, sending to self is not shown as pending. Total balance is just reduced by fees. Presumably because the wallet is allowed to spend unconfirmed change.
150 2017-12-06 16:00:34	0|Provoostenator|However even on master, restarting changes what's displayed. I can't remember how though, will try again in a bit.
151 2017-12-06 16:01:35	0|Provoostenator|I there any way to boost compilation speed by spinning up a few EC2 nodes?
152 2017-12-06 16:03:25	0|Provoostenator|Back in  my iOs days, this type of buggy behavior usually was a result of using the database on the wrong thread.
153 2017-12-06 16:03:31	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #11838: qa: Add getrawtransaction in_active_chain=False test (06master...06Mf1712-qaRpcRawTx) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11838
154 2017-12-06 16:04:06	0|Provoostenator|But obviously it could be something completely different here.
155 2017-12-06 16:07:01	0|instagibbs|ugh, getbalance api. what a trainwreck
156 2017-12-06 16:08:03	0|instagibbs|going to debug once it re-compiled with --enable-debug...
157 2017-12-06 16:33:51	0|instagibbs|conclusion: unconfirmed to-self payments will never enter balance on restart, fixing
158 2017-12-06 16:41:20	0|achow101|instagibbs: is that present in current master?
159 2017-12-06 16:41:28	0|achow101|or just 11403
160 2017-12-06 16:42:10	0|instagibbs|master
161 2017-12-06 16:42:29	0|instagibbs|remind me again where triggering rebroadcast is done during normal operation?
162 2017-12-06 16:42:32	0|instagibbs|wallet rebroadcast*
163 2017-12-06 16:42:40	0|instagibbs|IIRc it's a signal somewhere I cannot find, heh
164 2017-12-06 16:43:47	0|achow101|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/wallet.cpp#L1990
165 2017-12-06 16:44:19	0|achow101|grep for ResendWalletTransactions
166 2017-12-06 16:44:29	0|instagibbs|yeah found old PR where ryanofsky thought it was unused code and tried removing it
167 2017-12-06 16:45:33	0|achow101|hah, lol
168 2017-12-06 16:45:41	0|instagibbs|wondering why ReacceptWalletTransactions doesn't use RelayWalletTransaction
169 2017-12-06 16:45:51	0|ryanofsky|heh, that was a more embarrassing pr
170 2017-12-06 16:46:00	0|instagibbs|eh, i had a hard time finding it again on my own
171 2017-12-06 16:46:02	0|instagibbs|:P
172 2017-12-06 16:46:19	0|instagibbs|I have a minimal fix for it, but wondering if we can do better. Seems brittle.
173 2017-12-06 18:16:23	0|Provoostenator|#11839 for anyone interested
174 2017-12-06 18:16:25	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11839 | dont attempt mempool entry for wallet transactions on startup if alr… by instagibbs · Pull Request #11839 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
175 2017-12-06 18:48:04	0|cluelessperson|is bitcoin core planning on implementing lightning built in?
176 2017-12-06 18:53:01	0|sipa|i don't know, are you? :)
177 2017-12-06 18:59:04	0|BlueMatt|jamesob: wait, are you seeing this on reindex
178 2017-12-06 18:59:07	0|BlueMatt|or during normal operation?
179 2017-12-06 18:59:35	0|sipa|BlueMatt: looks like reindex to me
180 2017-12-06 18:59:44	0|sipa|(it's processing blocks from 2015 in his dump)
181 2017-12-06 19:00:55	0|jamesob|yep, reindex
182 2017-12-06 19:01:36	0|BlueMatt|sipa: hmm, my rss is reliably 500MB+ more than dbcache listed in debug.log
183 2017-12-06 19:01:42	0|BlueMatt|and thats true of 0.15.1 too, afaict
184 2017-12-06 19:02:03	0|sipa|sure, but not 5GB
185 2017-12-06 19:02:09	0|BlueMatt|yea
186 2017-12-06 19:02:32	0|sipa|during early reindex it's around 300MB on top of dbcache for me on 0.15.1
187 2017-12-06 19:02:42	0|sipa|near the end of the chain it's probably a bit more
188 2017-12-06 19:04:42	0|hkjn0|just curious, do we currently have graphs somewhere of memory consumption / other resource usage over time for nodes built at different commits on master?
189 2017-12-06 19:04:50	0|BlueMatt|not afaik :/
190 2017-12-06 19:04:50	0|hkjn0|even if it took many hours to gather the data and only could be done rarely (say once per day) it might limit the range of commits where a leak could sneak in..
191 2017-12-06 19:06:52	0|sipa|that would be nice to have
192 2017-12-06 19:06:58	0|sipa|heap usage during reindex graphs
193 2017-12-06 19:07:03	0|sipa|as well as performance graphs
194 2017-12-06 19:09:15	0|hkjn0|cool, I'll start taking notes / hacking something up on that..
195 2017-12-06 19:09:39	0|BlueMatt|zcash has some stuff to do that
196 2017-12-06 19:09:45	0|BlueMatt|may want to look into copying their stuff, dunno
197 2017-12-06 19:10:11	0|sipa|hkjn0: cool!
198 2017-12-06 19:14:03	0|hkjn0|right BlueMatt.. seems to be available at https://speed.z.cash/
199 2017-12-06 19:17:01	0|hkjn0|hmm, maybe this is going on a tangent, but would such regular measurements that also showed IBD time be useful? or is that measured automatically somewhere? (i know people have done one-off measurements of different releases..)
200 2017-12-06 19:17:22	0|sipa|hkjn0: no, that would be awesome to have, and we currently don't have it
201 2017-12-06 19:24:52	0|jamesob|hkjn0: +1
202 2017-12-06 20:08:50	0|jonasschnelli|hkjn0: that would be nice. sdaftuar once mentioned that he has something like a network bypasser...
203 2017-12-06 20:09:28	0|jonasschnelli|Because you want to measure IBD without measuring the network stack
204 2017-12-06 20:09:34	0|jonasschnelli|(that would be another thing though)
205 2017-12-06 20:09:49	0|sipa|you can benchmark reindex-chainstate instead
206 2017-12-06 20:26:34	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11281/files#r154675029, does ReadBlockFromDisk requires cs_main? I don't think so.
207 2017-12-06 20:27:53	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: ReadBlockFromDisk itself doesn't, but reading the disk pos information from CBlockIndex does
208 2017-12-06 20:28:01	0|sipa|(as it's mutable data in case you're pruning)
209 2017-12-06 20:31:36	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: that means that pindex->GetBlockPos() (accessing nFile, nPos) needs cs_main?
210 2017-12-06 20:31:36	0|sipa|yes
211 2017-12-06 20:32:15	0|jonasschnelli|Oh.. then ReadBlockFromDisk should be refactored to allow the actual disk access without cs_main
212 2017-12-06 20:49:07	0|BlueMatt|<BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: there are two ReadBlockFromDisk's - one requires cs_main to read non-const CBlockIndex fields, one does not
213 2017-12-06 20:49:09	0|BlueMatt|<BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: most obvious cs_main-needing-bit: GetBlockPos reads CBlockIndex.nChainState
214 2017-12-06 20:57:15	0|jnewbery|aj: delayed pong
215 2017-12-06 20:59:39	0|aj|jnewbery: nice
216 2017-12-06 21:00:33	0|aj|jnewbery: i guess you've seen pr 4 on your repo now?
217 2017-12-06 21:01:24	0|jnewbery|aj: I hadn't, I'm a little behind. I'll take a look now
218 2017-12-06 21:01:43	0|aj|jnewbery: okay, well that's the content of the ping :)
219 2017-12-06 21:04:13	0|jonasschnelli|BlueMatt: thanks. Got it. will update the PR soon
220 2017-12-06 21:26:04	0|jnewbery|aj: thanks - I've commented on your PR. Looks good to me
221 2017-12-06 21:29:52	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: still around by any chance?
222 2017-12-06 21:30:16	0|aj|jnewbery: i guess the right approach for dropping LEEWAY is for me to go through all the outstanding PRs and comment on the ones that add tests to fix the name, and drop LEEWAY once the second PR goes in and there aren't any pending PRs that haven't adopted the newnaming scheme. should be easy to semi-automate
223 2017-12-06 21:30:32	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: please ping me when you have a few min to look at the signing cert stuff
224 2017-12-06 21:30:50	0|jonasschnelli|cfields: currently on the go.. will be back at my desk in about 9hs
225 2017-12-06 21:31:42	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: np. Not sure if I'll still be around, though. I'll try to hop on before bed.
226 2017-12-06 21:35:56	0|jonasschnelli|okay..  I'll ping you and we will see
227 2017-12-06 21:36:33	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: thanks!
228 2017-12-06 21:42:15	0|BlueMatt|sipa: typo?
229 2017-12-06 21:42:29	0|BlueMatt|#11825 is definitely not fixed by "final TODOs for release notes for 0.15"
230 2017-12-06 21:42:30	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11825 | When running bitcoind I keep getting - boost::filesystem::space: Operation not permitted · Issue #11825 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
231 2017-12-06 21:43:02	0|sipa|BlueMatt: yes
232 2017-12-06 21:43:08	0|sipa|it's #11829
233 2017-12-06 21:43:11	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11829 | Test datadir specified in conf file exists by MeshCollider · Pull Request #11829 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
234 2017-12-06 21:44:48	0|BlueMatt|ahah, heh, ok, i missed the error that non-existent datadir would give
235 2017-12-06 21:55:14	0|BlueMatt|sipa: I'd say #3465 is sufficiently out of date it could just be closed
236 2017-12-06 21:55:15	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3465 | [RFC] Post-0.9 network/protocol/main refactor · Issue #3465 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
237 2017-12-06 21:58:02	0|sipa|hahaha