1 2018-05-07 09:10:00	0|provoostenator|TL&DR: 3:00 hours on t2.2xlarge, c5.2xlarge, 3:50 hours on m5.2xlarge. I ran out of ideas to make it run faster, see logs in #blockchain-sync.
  2 2018-05-07 10:28:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15glaksmono opened pull request #13183: [WIP][bitcoin-11004] New Travis job for CHECK_DOCS steps (06master...06bitcoin-11004) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13183
  3 2018-05-07 10:49:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fad63eb 15John Newbery: [logging] Don't incorrectly log that REJECT messages are unknown....
  4 2018-05-07 10:49:13	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/66cc47be982a...a174702bad1c
  5 2018-05-07 10:49:14	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a174702 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13162: [net] Don't incorrectly log that REJECT messages are unknown....
  6 2018-05-07 10:50:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13162: [net] Don't incorrectly log that REJECT messages are unknown. (06master...06fix_reject_logging) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13162
  7 2018-05-07 10:54:39	0|jtimon|sorry, I forgot to fix BlueMatt's latest nits on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10757 fixed now
  8 2018-05-07 10:56:00	0|jtimon|btw, I'm confused about what "matt was here" means in this context. I thought it was mostly for refactors and meant something like "I don't see the value of this refactor but it doesn't break things and I don't care, so I won't nack", but this is adding new functionality
  9 2018-05-07 10:56:39	0|jtimon|can someone clarify what's that supposed to mean, perhaps we can put that on the documentation like we have ACK, utACK, etc ?
 10 2018-05-07 10:57:06	0|luke-jr|jtimon: the impression I got (but I never asked him) was that it was a kind of "I looked at this, but I didn't review it sufficiently to ACK"
 11 2018-05-07 10:59:34	0|jtimon|luke-jr: I was under the impression he had reviewed it enough, but perhaps that's it
 12 2018-05-07 11:01:01	0|luke-jr|well, sounds like BlueMatt should clarify ;)
 13 2018-05-07 11:28:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a174702bad1c...6a01a50f4906
 14 2018-05-07 11:28:27	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1443f3dec 15donaloconnor: Remove enum specifier (to avoid re-declare scoped enum as unscoped)
 15 2018-05-07 11:28:27	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146a01a50 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #13180: Fix re-declared scoped enum as unscoped (Causes issues with some compilers)...
 16 2018-05-07 11:29:02	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #13180: Fix re-declared scoped enum as unscoped (Causes issues with some compilers) (06master...0606052018_unscoped_enum) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13180
 17 2018-05-07 11:39:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6a01a50f4906...bd83704ec6fa
 18 2018-05-07 11:39:21	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1420ce5af 15practicalswift: Print a log message if we fail to shrink the debug log file
 19 2018-05-07 11:39:21	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1429c9bdc 15practicalswift: Handle unsuccessful fseek(...):s
 20 2018-05-07 11:39:22	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14bd83704 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13149: Handle unsuccessful fseek(...):s...
 21 2018-05-07 11:40:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13149: Handle unsuccessful fseek(...):s (06master...06fseek) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13149
 22 2018-05-07 12:33:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bd83704ec6fa...57aae632e288
 23 2018-05-07 12:33:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1457aae63 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13131: Add Windows shutdown handler...
 24 2018-05-07 12:33:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ddebde7 15Chun Kuan Lee: Add Windows shutdown handler
 25 2018-05-07 12:33:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13131: Add Windows shutdown handler (06master...06win-quit) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13131
 26 2018-05-07 13:03:23	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145778d44 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #13079: Fix rescanblockchain rpc to properly report progress...
 27 2018-05-07 13:04:02	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #13079: Fix rescanblockchain rpc to properly report progress (06master...06scan-for-wallet-stopblock-progress) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13079
 28 2018-05-07 13:14:45	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ab3f4dd 15Chun Kuan Lee: tests: Add test for 64-bit PE, modify 32-bit test results...
 29 2018-05-07 13:14:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5778d44aa857...bf9b03ddcc65
 30 2018-05-07 13:14:46	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14bf9b03d 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13094: tests: Add test for 64-bit Windows PE, modify 32-bit test results...
 31 2018-05-07 13:15:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13094: tests: Add test for 64-bit Windows PE, modify 32-bit test results (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13094
 32 2018-05-07 13:22:50	0|wumpus|#10267 gives me an unicorn
 33 2018-05-07 13:22:54	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10267 | New -includeconf argument for including external configuration files by kallewoof · Pull Request #10267 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 34 2018-05-07 13:28:58	0|wumpus|I'll complain to github
 35 2018-05-07 13:35:16	0|aj|wumpus: tried clearing your cookies?
 36 2018-05-07 13:35:46	0|wumpus|yeah I can try that again...
 37 2018-05-07 13:37:15	0|jonasschnelli|Also getting a unicorn
 38 2018-05-07 13:37:17	0|wumpus|though I have a hard time believing my browser's handling of cookies is at fault here
 39 2018-05-07 13:38:13	0|wumpus|contacted github anyhow
 40 2018-05-07 13:42:32	0|Oldnewbie|Quit
 41 2018-05-07 13:45:18	0|promag|unicorn too
 42 2018-05-07 13:46:20	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: btw - what is the process for importing a new libbtc into bitcoincore-indexd? I need MSG_WITNESS_BLOCK
 43 2018-05-07 13:46:25	0|wumpus|is it a subtree?
 44 2018-05-07 13:46:46	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: I think I have added it as subtree
 45 2018-05-07 13:47:07	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: BTW: I'm currently running a script that runs 10 times block fetching from 490000 till 500000 and measures times
 46 2018-05-07 13:47:19	0|jonasschnelli|Currently running on master... will compare than against your PR and report.
 47 2018-05-07 13:47:31	0|jonasschnelli|Since this is on SSD, may result may be even more promissing then yours
 48 2018-05-07 13:48:00	0|wumpus|I hope so :)
 49 2018-05-07 13:48:17	0|wumpus|though 10% gain is already somewhat neat
 50 2018-05-07 13:48:45	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: Yes! 10% is already great!
 51 2018-05-07 13:50:14	0|BlueMatt|jtimon: in this case it means what you thought - "I dont care about this feature, so I'm not gonna ack it, but it seems like some folks want it, so certainly wont oppose. Aside from the comments left, I see no other bugs, and so am fine with it advancing, but do not wish to in any way imply a concept ack"
 52 2018-05-07 13:55:18	0|BlueMatt|luke-jr: plz2rebase #12208? Trying to whip 0.16.1 :p
 53 2018-05-07 13:55:21	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12208 | GUI: Rephrase Bech32 checkbox texts, and enable it with legacy address default by luke-jr · Pull Request #12208 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 54 2018-05-07 13:59:39	0|jtimon|BlueMatt: thanks for claryfing
 55 2018-05-07 14:11:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15harding opened pull request #13184: RPC Docs: gettxout*: clarify bestblock and unspent counts (06master...062018-05-rpc-help-bestblock) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13184
 56 2018-05-07 14:11:23	0|jonasschnelli|How do I only allow connection from 127.0.0.1?
 57 2018-05-07 14:11:32	0|glaksmono|hi guys, i'm trying to find a reviewer for this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13183
 58 2018-05-07 14:11:34	0|glaksmono|can someone help?
 59 2018-05-07 14:11:35	0|jonasschnelli|Seems like whitelist=127.0.0.1 and connect=0 won't work
 60 2018-05-07 14:11:49	0|jonasschnelli|glaksmono: have some patience
 61 2018-05-07 14:12:00	0|glaksmono|alright @jonasschnelli
 62 2018-05-07 14:12:05	0|glaksmono|i'm a newbie contributor :)
 63 2018-05-07 14:12:19	0|jonasschnelli|glaksmono: also, maybe write some pull request description (not only refere to the issue)
 64 2018-05-07 14:13:13	0|jonasschnelli|NM: whitebind=127.0.0.1:8333 fixed my issue
 65 2018-05-07 14:28:14	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: subtree merge from libbtc/libbtc gives me tons of conflicts
 66 2018-05-07 14:29:15	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: try rm -rf src/libbtc and then a fresh git subtree add?
 67 2018-05-07 14:29:37	0|jonasschnelli|I'm pretty sure I haven't done local changes
 68 2018-05-07 14:29:39	0|wumpus|or I'll resolve the conflicts to 'theirs'
 69 2018-05-07 14:29:48	0|jonasschnelli|yeah
 70 2018-05-07 14:29:56	0|wumpus|let's see if it still builds at all
 71 2018-05-07 14:31:29	0|jonasschnelli|I don't know why I had to manually add a LDADD+=-lpthread in the bitcoincore-indexd project... seems that lpthread will not auto-added via Makefile.leveldb.am
 72 2018-05-07 14:39:50	0|jonasschnelli|hmm... master is quicker then PR 13151?! let me double check...
 73 2018-05-07 14:40:06	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: eh whoops libbbtc serialize.h has two LIBBTC_END_DECL
 74 2018-05-07 14:40:28	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: hmm.. that was a recent change by promag...
 75 2018-05-07 14:40:36	0|jonasschnelli|should this not have been detected by travis..
 76 2018-05-07 14:44:51	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: if that header is used in one of the tests, which I assume, yes :)
 77 2018-05-07 14:47:29	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: I think I know why travis passed with it: in C, the macros are defined as nothing
 78 2018-05-07 14:47:45	0|wumpus|this problem is only apparent when the lib is used from C++
 79 2018-05-07 14:49:06	0|jonasschnelli|ah.. right!
 80 2018-05-07 14:50:00	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: any reason why your PR 13151 preforms ~6% slower then master?
 81 2018-05-07 14:50:46	0|jonasschnelli|I just reverted back to 598db389c33e5e90783ef1223df2eeab095ed622 from 13151 head to make sure im comparing the right things
 82 2018-05-07 14:50:47	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: you do request MSG_WITNESS_BLOCK at all?
 83 2018-05-07 14:51:11	0|jonasschnelli|let me dbl check
 84 2018-05-07 14:51:46	0|wumpus|if so, I'm confused, I don't see how this can be *slower*
 85 2018-05-07 14:52:01	0|wumpus|maybe add back the LogPrintf to make sure it's hitting the new fast path at all
 86 2018-05-07 14:52:16	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: ser_u32(inv_msg_cstr, 2 | (1 << 30));
 87 2018-05-07 14:52:18	0|jonasschnelli|seems correct
 88 2018-05-07 14:52:22	0|wumpus|yes
 89 2018-05-07 14:56:46	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: you mean that one: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13151/commits/4c790dff7481d1464a906ad6b17a3179a7da3431#diff-eff7adeaec73a769788bb78858815c91R1149?
 90 2018-05-07 15:00:09	0|wumpus|yes the ""debug: Serving raw block directly from disk"
 91 2018-05-07 15:00:29	0|wumpus|although remove it when performance benchmarking, as all the log messages will again make it slower...
 92 2018-05-07 15:01:05	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. Sure
 93 2018-05-07 15:01:26	0|jonasschnelli|jup.. its firing...
 94 2018-05-07 15:02:08	0|jonasschnelli|I do now disable the logprintf and test again...
 95 2018-05-07 15:32:43	0|promag|wumpus: regarding block.resize(blk_size);
 96 2018-05-07 15:33:42	0|promag|filein.read((char*)block.data(), blk_size) will overwrite those zeros.. so I really don't get it
 97 2018-05-07 15:34:04	0|wumpus|what if it somehow fails
 98 2018-05-07 15:34:35	0|wumpus|my point is defense in depth here
 99 2018-05-07 15:35:02	0|promag|you mean read fails?
100 2018-05-07 15:35:12	0|wumpus|yes
101 2018-05-07 15:35:54	0|promag|then it shouldn't serve, it should fail?
102 2018-05-07 15:36:02	0|wumpus|it should, but a bug might prevent that
103 2018-05-07 15:36:10	0|wumpus|either a kernel bug or something else
104 2018-05-07 15:38:01	0|promag|ok, I wounder if it has performance impact regarding jonas bench
105 2018-05-07 15:38:13	0|wumpus|only if you can measure a significant improvement of not zeroing I'm willing to argue about this further
106 2018-05-07 15:38:34	0|wumpus|otherwise it seems pointless shed painting...
107 2018-05-07 15:38:52	0|jamesob|hm. If I'm gonna implement a threadsafe ring buffer for use with the async logging stuff, better to do that as a general module (a util sort of thing) or within a logging-specific module?
108 2018-05-07 15:40:10	0|wumpus|jamesob: depends on how much work it is to make it general instead of specific, and how much extra code that brings. If not much, making it general is preferable of course.
109 2018-05-07 15:40:32	0|jamesob|wumpus: good advice, thanks
110 2018-05-07 15:42:43	0|sipa|wumpus, promag: is there even a way to resize a vector _without_ initializing the chars to 0?
111 2018-05-07 15:42:54	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: seems you merged https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bitcoincore-indexd/pull/1, I think we had to update it to include https://github.com/libbtc/libbtc/pull/127
112 2018-05-07 15:42:59	0|wumpus|sipa: no :/
113 2018-05-07 15:44:50	0|wumpus|so indeed, I don't know what the c++11 "nice" way to do that is, could use a unique_ptr to a new [] array instead of a vector, or something else, but nothing seems really elegant
114 2018-05-07 15:44:57	0|sipa|std::array :)
115 2018-05-07 15:45:07	0|sipa|which does not seem to require initializing the elements
116 2018-05-07 15:45:10	0|wumpus|does that work for variable lengths?
117 2018-05-07 15:45:13	0|sipa|no
118 2018-05-07 15:47:59	0|spudowiar|How is someone actually supposed to say they know C++ when you might blink and we'll suddenly be on C++18428 and it'll look like some dialect of Python
119 2018-05-07 15:50:53	0|spudowiar|https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/memory/UninitializedMemoryHacks.h
120 2018-05-07 15:51:36	0|spudowiar|That looks perfectly safe and not at all a terrible hack
121 2018-05-07 15:56:30	0|cfields|sipa: I believe a std::vector with a custom allocator can
122 2018-05-07 16:05:00	0|wumpus|spudowiar: yeah... language evolution is not a bad thing, and c++11 brings a lot of useful things, but c++ is alread such a crazy complex language, it's increasingly impossible to say you really know it.
123 2018-05-07 16:09:09	0|sipa|spudowiar: "folly" i would say
124 2018-05-07 16:10:14	0|wumpus|yes it scares me, let's just zero the vector ok
125 2018-05-07 16:16:59	0|sipa|wumpus: ack
126 2018-05-07 16:18:08	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: meh. yes. Let me push a subtree update then.
127 2018-05-07 16:20:18	0|promag|jonasschnelli: wumpus: should libbtc have a c++ job in travis?
128 2018-05-07 16:23:33	0|jonasschnelli|promag: yes. a little c++ test would be great.
129 2018-05-07 16:32:34	0|wumpus|promag: I think for most intents and purposes it doesn't matter, for a C library, except the specific thing (`extern "C" {` in headers) you were changing
130 2018-05-07 16:47:04	0|promag|BlueMatt: I can rebase #13063 on master and leave walletmanager out for now
131 2018-05-07 16:47:06	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13063 | Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance by promag · Pull Request #13063 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
132 2018-05-07 16:48:00	0|BlueMatt|I mean I presume given the annoyance of moving forward with the loadwallet stuff we should do a minimal fix to get that through, and then we can clean it up as all that stuff matures
133 2018-05-07 16:49:22	0|promag|so you suggest to reopen #12647?
134 2018-05-07 16:49:25	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12647 | wallet: Fix possible memory leak in CreateWalletFromFile. by jimpo · Pull Request #12647 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
135 2018-05-07 16:49:32	0|promag|BlueMatt: annoyance? :)
136 2018-05-07 18:21:59	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa opened pull request #13185: Bugfix: the end of a reorged chain is invalid when connect fails (06master...06201805_bugfix_invalidchain_end) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13185
137 2018-05-07 18:49:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15skeees opened pull request #13186: Use a semaphore to trigger shutdown procedures (06master...06shutdown-cv) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13186
138 2018-05-07 18:54:59	0|DrDraake|hey guys
139 2018-05-07 19:00:26	0|DrDraake|Don't know if this is the right channel.  If someone has a offline bitcoin core wallet showing a balance and you can do not see the corresponding wallet on chain.  If they send you a core to core transaction offline and you bring your core wallet online can that transaction confirm and previously they have sent the same amount of BTC to someone else who gets the BTC?  Will it show in my wallet and when I go to spend it wil
140 2018-05-07 19:01:32	0|BlueMatt|DrDraake: you probably want #bitcoin, but, if a transaction is not mine-able and your node is synced, it will be displayed as "conflicted"
141 2018-05-07 19:01:47	0|BlueMatt|(probably)
142 2018-05-07 19:02:25	0|DrDraake|I'm trying to figure out how can this wallet send me BTC if I can not verify they have the coin to begin with....
143 2018-05-07 19:02:48	0|BlueMatt|you probably want #bitcoin, way more people there to help you out if you clarify what you want to do
144 2018-05-07 19:02:59	0|DrDraake|Thanks
145 2018-05-07 20:36:13	0|jnewbery|I think we should consider putting #10973 on high priority for review. So far it has full review from jamesob and me, and partial review from jeremyrubin.
146 2018-05-07 20:36:17	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10973 | Refactor: separate wallet from node by ryanofsky · Pull Request #10973 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
147 2018-05-07 20:38:01	0|jnewbery|It's a large changeset (+1526,-670), so it's quite an involved review. I don't know if it makes sense to chop it up into smaller PRs (although logically, the intermediate commits don't really make sense unless we take the whole lot)
148 2018-05-07 20:38:09	0|jnewbery|Perhaps something to discuss at the next meeting
149 2018-05-07 20:39:50	0|promag|BlueMatt: could you take a look at #13063? ty
150 2018-05-07 20:39:51	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13063 | Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance by promag · Pull Request #13063 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
151 2018-05-07 20:40:42	0|promag|jnewbery: I was planning to see that one too
152 2018-05-07 20:51:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f30e9be 15David A. Harding: RPC Docs: gettxout*: clarify bestblock and unspent counts
153 2018-05-07 20:51:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bf9b03ddcc65...6b824c090f53
154 2018-05-07 20:51:07	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146b824c0 15MarcoFalke: Merge #13184: RPC Docs: gettxout*: clarify bestblock and unspent counts...
155 2018-05-07 20:51:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #13184: RPC Docs: gettxout*: clarify bestblock and unspent counts (06master...062018-05-rpc-help-bestblock) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13184
156 2018-05-07 20:55:52	0|jamesob|when writing a class that mimics a vector, should our naming conventions take precedence over interface imitation? e.g. PushBack vs. push_back
157 2018-05-07 21:00:52	0|skeees|if you're just adding something that exists in a future std (e.g. c++17) then preference is to maintain api compatibility
158 2018-05-07 22:22:31	0|jimpo|Friendly reminder: #12254 is still ready for review
159 2018-05-07 22:22:34	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12254 | BIP 158: Compact Block Filters for Light Clients by jimpo · Pull Request #12254 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
160 2018-05-07 22:31:23	0|luke-jr|BlueMatt: what timeframe do you need it in? been meaning to rebase/address stuff for a week or so now..
161 2018-05-07 22:43:50	0|satwo|Hi all, wasn't able to get a clear answer in #bitcoin, so thought I'd ask here: Why is nSequence an input-level field while nLockTime is transaction-level, and what happens when there are multiple inputs with different nSequence values?
162 2018-05-07 22:50:27	0|luke-jr|satwo: originally, or today?
163 2018-05-07 22:53:05	0|satwo|luke-jr Today, though if evolution of the protocol would shed light on it I'd be interested in that too.
164 2018-05-07 23:04:13	0|fanquake|eklitzke Any chance you can rebase #12744 ?
165 2018-05-07 23:04:16	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12744 | WIP: eliminate dependency on boost::program_options by eklitzke · Pull Request #12744 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub