1 2012-05-20 00:01:53 <jgarzik> luke-jr:  did you have a crash?  or rename blkindex.dat -> txhash.dat or anything strange like that?  any manual database file manipulation?
   2 2012-05-20 00:02:23 <jgarzik> luke-jr: er, by that I mean, did you have a crash _before_ the crash you reported?  something that might have caused the database to give a short read?
   3 2012-05-20 00:02:48 <luke-jr> jgarzik: not that I'm aware of
   4 2012-05-20 00:02:58 <luke-jr> (and I would have probably noticed)
   5 2012-05-20 00:04:01 <luke-jr> moreover, I recently (about a week ago) rebuilt my block db with -loadblock
   6 2012-05-20 00:08:12 * luke-jr tests with another HOME dir
   7 2012-05-20 00:10:15 <luke-jr> jgarzik: getting the ORPHAN BLOCK flood on another HOME dir too - is that expected?
   8 2012-05-20 00:12:29 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
   9 2012-05-20 00:12:31 <luke-jr> crashed
  10 2012-05-20 00:15:13 <jgarzik> luke-jr: the crash is easy to fix:  wrap a try {} around the CDataStream usage
  11 2012-05-20 00:15:29 <jgarzik> luke-jr: but #blockindex should spend a long time upgrading your database -- does that happen?
  12 2012-05-20 00:15:34 <luke-jr> jgarzik: yes
  13 2012-05-20 00:16:14 <luke-jr> jgarzik: will wrapping a try{} fix it, or just hide it?
  14 2012-05-20 00:21:09 <sipa> the problem is when your old blk0001.dat has a corrupted block on it, a corruption that happened after downloading
  15 2012-05-20 00:21:47 <sipa> in that case every block after it will result in an orphan, and potentially exhaust your memory soon afterwards
  16 2012-05-20 00:22:09 <sipa> maybe LoadExternalBlockFile should just stop at the point where it encounters a corrupt block
  17 2012-05-20 00:22:33 <BlueMatt> or not load orphans?
  18 2012-05-20 00:22:50 <BlueMatt> or limit orphan chain size?
  19 2012-05-20 00:22:56 <sipa> just not storing orphans is maybe even beter
  20 2012-05-20 00:26:19 <sipa> but, to be more specific to luke-jr's problem... i'don understand how that can occur without a corrupt block
  21 2012-05-20 00:31:58 <luke-jr> sipa: it's reporting orphans from the first block
  22 2012-05-20 00:33:14 <sipa> hmmm... the first block should be the genesis block no matter what happened
  23 2012-05-20 00:33:19 <luke-jr> ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK, prev=00000000000000000000
  24 2012-05-20 00:33:26 <sipa> and the genesis block shouldn't ever be an orphan
  25 2012-05-20 00:33:52 <sipa> wait... jgarzik: did you put the genesis block in the new block chain being established?
  26 2012-05-20 00:36:00 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
  27 2012-05-20 00:36:20 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  28 2012-05-20 00:36:38 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
  29 2012-05-20 00:38:49 <jgarzik> sipa: The code calls LoadBlockIndex() to initialize the [empty] database, then LoadExternalBlockFile() just like -loadblock=
  30 2012-05-20 00:38:51 minimoose has joined
  31 2012-05-20 00:39:02 <jgarzik> sipa: there is nothing strange or new
  32 2012-05-20 00:39:05 <sipa> hmmm
  33 2012-05-20 00:40:33 <jgarzik> sipa: luke-jr "on the top" (i.e. not the root cause) crash is caused by a problem that we should fix anyway:  several CDataStream uses for deserialization inside db.{h,cpp} are not enclosed with try{}, and will therefore throw an uncaught exception if there is any problem during de-ser.
  34 2012-05-20 00:40:47 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
  35 2012-05-20 00:41:12 <jgarzik> but why this is happening, even so?  good question...
  36 2012-05-20 00:41:36 * jgarzik plans to add try{} in a separate, standalone branch
  37 2012-05-20 00:41:53 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
  38 2012-05-20 00:42:57 <sipa> luke-jr: any chance your merging/rebasing caused this, or are you just running jgarzik's patch?
  39 2012-05-20 00:43:18 <luke-jr> sipa: I don't see how it would be related, but I can try without it
  40 2012-05-20 00:43:40 <luke-jr> to clarify, should I try jgarzik's branch directly, or merge it on top of master?
  41 2012-05-20 00:43:45 moa7 has joined
  42 2012-05-20 00:44:47 <luke-jr> (also, git bisect did go into the branch itself, IIRC)
  43 2012-05-20 00:45:05 <sipa> probably doesn't matter, but as it doesn't merge cleanly with master anymore, just use his branch?
  44 2012-05-20 00:45:25 merde has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  45 2012-05-20 00:46:15 <luke-jr> k
  46 2012-05-20 00:46:47 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: while Im rebasing cblockstore, are there any non-major things that would make it more palatable to you?
  47 2012-05-20 00:48:34 * luke-jr votes for pizza
  48 2012-05-20 00:48:50 <BlueMatt> ooo, I could go for some pizza
  49 2012-05-20 00:49:31 <sipa> BlueMatt: i have one - don't call it CBlockStore; it's not a blockstore at all at this point, and if i understand things correctly neither will it
  50 2012-05-20 00:49:43 <luke-jr> O.o
  51 2012-05-20 00:50:12 <sipa> CHub, CMessager, ...
  52 2012-05-20 00:50:23 <BlueMatt> sipa: fair enough
  53 2012-05-20 00:50:51 <BlueMatt> wumpus: re: #1336/commit f1e757, mind adding the new stuff from doc/assets-attribution.txt to contrib/debian/copyright?
  54 2012-05-20 00:51:07 <sipa> i expect network and blockchain management to be turned into classes as a next step, and making them clients to what-is-currently-called-CBlockStore
  55 2012-05-20 00:52:07 <sipa> BlueMatt: also, semaphores known to you?
  56 2012-05-20 00:52:11 merde has joined
  57 2012-05-20 00:52:24 mmoya_ has joined
  58 2012-05-20 00:52:25 <BlueMatt> sipa: elaborate?
  59 2012-05-20 00:53:32 * BlueMatt had nfc wtf a semaphore was before he was sitting on the plane trying to guess while rebasing, to answer your question...what did I fuck up?
  60 2012-05-20 00:53:42 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
  61 2012-05-20 00:54:02 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: rename would be nice, as sipa said
  62 2012-05-20 00:54:05 <BlueMatt> yea, yea...noob and all...
  63 2012-05-20 00:54:22 <sipa> BlueMatt: it's basically a mutex that allows more than one process to take a lock
  64 2012-05-20 00:54:38 <sipa> or a mutex can be seen as a semaphore that can only have value 1 or 0
  65 2012-05-20 00:54:53 <BlueMatt> yea, so I guessed(ish)
  66 2012-05-20 00:55:27 <sipa> it's currently implemented using a boost condition variable (though god knows how many times it will still need to be changed...)
  67 2012-05-20 00:55:49 <sipa> but what you need actually sounds like a semaphore as well
  68 2012-05-20 00:56:11 <sipa> it's just one maintaining the counter of queued messages
  69 2012-05-20 00:56:13 * jgarzik just, in general, favors a "peeling-off" approach...  Just create CChainServer and CWalletServer classes, and require all parties to go through those two entities
  70 2012-05-20 00:56:33 <jgarzik> smashing everything together into one big kitchen sink, only to plan to pull it apart later, seems like more work
  71 2012-05-20 00:56:44 <jgarzik> bitcoin is already one big kitchen sink
  72 2012-05-20 00:56:49 <sipa> jgarzik: i don't think we see it the same way
  73 2012-05-20 00:57:00 RainbowDashh has joined
  74 2012-05-20 00:57:17 <sipa> as i said, i like your idea, but it requires a lot more changes
  75 2012-05-20 00:57:38 <jgarzik> it really doesn't
  76 2012-05-20 00:57:56 <BlueMatt> sipa: have you seen the updated version, using CSemaphore? https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/commit/e99b0bc4355c63eeccd6d7cf825e61245b672287
  77 2012-05-20 00:57:57 <jgarzik> I'll create a few patches next week
  78 2012-05-20 00:58:45 <BlueMatt> as in, you'll create a few patches which are your version of cblockstore, or you'll write a few patches that fix cblockstore?
  79 2012-05-20 00:59:22 <jgarzik> I don't think CBlockStore is the right design at all, so it would go in a different direction
  80 2012-05-20 00:59:25 <luke-jr> branch itself works; testing with merged-to-master now
  81 2012-05-20 00:59:32 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: fair enough
  82 2012-05-20 00:59:42 <jgarzik> anyway, time to put the kid to sleep, back in 60 minutes
  83 2012-05-20 01:01:02 <jgarzik> design criticisms:  1) network should be hidden behind blockchain service, not exposed.  2) don't put blockchain service and wallet service together, as they are not only separate from have a 1-to-N relationship.  3) putting everything together in one big class is only marginally better than the current one-big-heap mess.
  84 2012-05-20 01:01:23 <luke-jr> merged-to-master is working too, but I don't recall making these merges before O.o
  85 2012-05-20 01:01:48 <sipa> jgarzik: wallet service has nothing to do with cblockstore at all
  86 2012-05-20 01:02:30 <sipa> cblockstore manages communication between net/chain/wallets; but not between wallet/ui/rpc
  87 2012-05-20 01:03:51 <gmaxwell> There is sort of an interest question about what we'd do with the RPC after splitting the wallet and blockchain.
  88 2012-05-20 01:04:03 <gmaxwell> Half the the rpc commands are blockchain ones, half are wallet ones.
  89 2012-05-20 01:04:12 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: 1) I suppose we see it opposite ways here, then...network should, imho, be entirely separate from blockchain stuff 2) they arent, nor are they very well split yet...currently they are still coupled where there used to be coupling (to keep cblockstore as close to exactly the same as master, for now, as I thought that would make it more palatable for merge/review) 3) true, but the goal is to open up room for improvement, not actually
  90 2012-05-20 01:04:12 <BlueMatt>  really improve
  91 2012-05-20 01:04:17 tower has joined
  92 2012-05-20 01:04:33 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: bitcoind can talk to 2 separate "upstreams"?
  93 2012-05-20 01:04:44 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: or better yet, make bitcoind modular…
  94 2012-05-20 01:04:52 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: the rpcdump.c seems to be a step toward that
  95 2012-05-20 01:05:00 <gmaxwell> or make the wallet just proxy some rpc calls to the chainserver.
  96 2012-05-20 01:05:29 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: seems uglier to proxy
  97 2012-05-20 01:05:37 <luke-jr> but maybe not
  98 2012-05-20 01:06:29 <sipa> jgarzik: i guess putting network behind the blockchain manager is meaningful; but remember that we may one day want to swap the blockchain component with another (SPV mode, to be specific)
  99 2012-05-20 01:06:30 <luke-jr> if it's a C++ API, proxying is IMO ugly; but when we go to a network stack, the protocol can be designed in a way that there's different directories
 100 2012-05-20 01:07:00 <luke-jr> aha, figured out the blockindex thing
 101 2012-05-20 01:07:12 <luke-jr> latest blockindex branch is OK, but the one I merged before was buggy
 102 2012-05-20 01:07:17 <gmaxwell> well, if the wallet itself wands to make those calls for the UI they have to cross the link ... and I think it would be annoying to figure out which one to ask. (Also from a security management perspective I think it's imporant to now have a bunch of ports which must be managed/secured)
 103 2012-05-20 01:07:21 <luke-jr> so I guess jgarzik fixed it
 104 2012-05-20 01:07:41 <sipa> jgarzik: so it feels easier to me to connect wallet/net/chain to one hub - you could drop the chain one, and things should keep functioning at least marginally
 105 2012-05-20 01:07:56 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I would assume gui would sit on top of/control wallet directly, then point it to+connect to a blockstore backend
 106 2012-05-20 01:08:17 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 107 2012-05-20 01:08:36 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: right, and RPC? I assume it would talk to a wallet (it must—) but then there are a bunch of rpccalls like getblock which are purely backend calls.
 108 2012-05-20 01:08:48 <BlueMatt> well rpc is an entirely other story...
 109 2012-05-20 01:08:49 <luke-jr> 35280ac <-- ORPHAN BLOCK + crash
 110 2012-05-20 01:09:25 * luke-jr lets the current commit finish upgrading to test it
 111 2012-05-20 01:12:29 Slix` has joined
 112 2012-05-20 01:13:03 c_k has joined
 113 2012-05-20 01:13:19 <sipa> how about one can configure different rpc users, each linked to one wallet?
 114 2012-05-20 01:14:02 <BlueMatt> or...if we assume wallets are gonna be run in another process from backend anyway (I hope they will, someday), the wallet can handle the rpc and just pass things on to the backend when needed
 115 2012-05-20 01:14:14 <BlueMatt> ugly, but...
 116 2012-05-20 01:14:26 <c_k> BlueMatt: Version messages aren't displayed correctly in bitcoind from stable ppa
 117 2012-05-20 01:14:31 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
 118 2012-05-20 01:14:33 <BlueMatt> hm?
 119 2012-05-20 01:14:39 <gmaxwell> sipa: one usecase for wallet backed split is that the wallet talks to a hosted backed run by someone trusted to not defraud you.  I don't think you'd want to proxy all your RPC through them, since they shouldn't have access to spend your funds.
 120 2012-05-20 01:14:40 Smoovious has joined
 121 2012-05-20 01:14:48 <BlueMatt> oh, that might make sense...
 122 2012-05-20 01:15:00 <BlueMatt> c_k: what do they show, exactly?
 123 2012-05-20 01:15:04 <gmaxwell> (I expect that that would be very popular for VPS services— the vps could 0wn you anyways, why not use their blockchain server?)
 124 2012-05-20 01:15:05 <BlueMatt> and isnt it broken for bitcoin-qt too?
 125 2012-05-20 01:15:16 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 126 2012-05-20 01:15:18 <sipa> BlueMatt: in that case the wallet rpcs must move to those other processes as well, imho
 127 2012-05-20 01:15:24 <c_k> I only use cli, I'll go look again
 128 2012-05-20 01:15:29 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: mmm, yea...
 129 2012-05-20 01:15:44 <sipa> BlueMatt, c_k: known problem in 0.6.2
 130 2012-05-20 01:15:53 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, just wanna make sure its the same one
 131 2012-05-20 01:15:59 <sipa> it's fixed for 0.7.0
 132 2012-05-20 01:16:06 <gmaxwell> c_k: does it call itself CLIENT_VERSION ?
 133 2012-05-20 01:16:42 wachtwoord has quit ()
 134 2012-05-20 01:17:40 eoss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 135 2012-05-20 01:18:25 <c_k> Yeah Bitcoin version vCLIENT_VERSION_MAJOR.CLIENT_VERSION_MINOR.CLIENT_VERSION_REVISION.CLIENT_VERSION_BUILD-g8ff1873-beta
 136 2012-05-20 01:18:41 <c_k> At top when doing bitcoind -help
 137 2012-05-20 01:18:56 <sipa> yup, known problem
 138 2012-05-20 01:19:04 <c_k> k, cool
 139 2012-05-20 01:19:59 <c_k> Another thing - is there a plan to get bitcoind included in ubuntu replaces with your stable releases? It's still at 0.3.24 -_-
 140 2012-05-20 01:20:35 <luke-jr> c_k: that's Debian's fault
 141 2012-05-20 01:20:35 <BlueMatt> c_k: not really anything I can do about that, have to talk to jonas (the debian packager of bitcoind)
 142 2012-05-20 01:20:52 <c_k> Ah
 143 2012-05-20 01:21:06 <luke-jr> 0.3.24 was the last version before we added the test suite
 144 2012-05-20 01:21:23 <luke-jr> now Debian is "omg 0.4.0+ breaks with big endian oh noes!"
 145 2012-05-20 01:21:36 <c_k> Of course, damn debian and it's glacial speed
 146 2012-05-20 01:21:46 <c_k> Oh I see
 147 2012-05-20 01:21:50 <luke-jr> (even though 0.3.24 and earlier were still broken - we just didn't test it)
 148 2012-05-20 01:21:55 <BlueMatt> its in unstable, just not testing...
 149 2012-05-20 01:21:58 <BlueMatt> which is quite fail
 150 2012-05-20 01:22:18 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I reported it, and explained that there's known security issues with 0.3.24 etc
 151 2012-05-20 01:22:32 <luke-jr> and got told off basically
 152 2012-05-20 01:22:35 rdponticelli_ is now known as rdponticelli
 153 2012-05-20 01:22:40 <luke-jr> "old versions aren't bugs"
 154 2012-05-20 01:22:42 <BlueMatt> as did I
 155 2012-05-20 01:22:59 <BlueMatt> though less strongly worded on both sides, I think
 156 2012-05-20 01:23:20 * luke-jr thinks it's irresponsible for Debian to ship 0.3.x at this point
 157 2012-05-20 01:23:26 <luke-jr> better to have nothing at all IMO
 158 2012-05-20 01:23:28 <BlueMatt> agreed
 159 2012-05-20 01:23:49 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: .. they had older versions working with big endian!?! bullshit
 160 2012-05-20 01:24:01 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: no, but they ship them...
 161 2012-05-20 01:24:03 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: no, but the older versions built and didn't-test without error
 162 2012-05-20 01:24:03 <gmaxwell> they might have had it successfully building (Because it has...) but not actually working.
 163 2012-05-20 01:24:42 <BlueMatt> also, I wish jonas would give up and just use the debian folder I wrote, though he prefers using some specific building wrappers, or atleast rewrite his scripts to build bitcoin-qt...
 164 2012-05-20 01:24:49 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: who is the involved debian people?
 165 2012-05-20 01:25:20 * BlueMatt has only ever talked to jonas, but theres also micah
 166 2012-05-20 01:25:23 <BlueMatt> http://packages.debian.org/sid/bitcoind
 167 2012-05-20 01:25:25 <gmaxwell> and was this on a public list?
 168 2012-05-20 01:25:28 <BlueMatt> under maintainers on the right side
 169 2012-05-20 01:25:37 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: their bug tracker
 170 2012-05-20 01:26:21 <BlueMatt> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=665922
 171 2012-05-20 01:27:08 * luke-jr wonders if he seriously expected me to go through 0.3.24's codebase and identify every bug we've fixed since then
 172 2012-05-20 01:27:21 <luke-jr> for 0.4.x, I could do that because I maintain it… but not 0.3
 173 2012-05-20 01:29:05 <c_k> I'm glad I stirred some discussion then :)
 174 2012-05-20 01:29:21 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 175 2012-05-20 01:29:36 <c_k> BlueMatt: Many thanks for the ppa btw :)
 176 2012-05-20 01:29:39 <gmaxwell> I wish debian would stop packaging things that they won't maintain and won't let people who will maintain them maintain them.
 177 2012-05-20 01:31:02 <BlueMatt> even if they refuse to upgrade the version on stable, upgrading testing would make sense...atleast then ubuntu would get upgraded
 178 2012-05-20 01:31:38 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: well, testing is about to become new stable too
 179 2012-05-20 01:31:49 <BlueMatt> that too
 180 2012-05-20 01:31:55 <luke-jr> if they upgrade testing to 0.6.2 now, I can probably maintain 0.6.x for their 3 years
 181 2012-05-20 01:31:58 <gmaxwell> yea, so the screwed up thing is that it'll also be stuck with a broken version.
 182 2012-05-20 01:33:29 <jgarzik> back, though the baby might explode again :)
 183 2012-05-20 01:34:04 <luke-jr> o.O
 184 2012-05-20 01:34:07 <jgarzik> it's not difficult to have two kitchen sinks, instead of one:  label kitchen sink A "wallets" and kitchen sink B "block chain and network"
 185 2012-05-20 01:34:19 <jgarzik> RPC and UI talk to those two entities
 186 2012-05-20 01:34:33 <jgarzik> yes, the entities sometimes talk to one another
 187 2012-05-20 01:34:44 <luke-jr> jgarzik: my orphan/crash issue was somehow fixed in your changed (blockindex) FWIW
 188 2012-05-20 01:35:11 <jgarzik> but putting them all together into one big kitchen sink is not the right direction WRT useful security and responsibility separation
 189 2012-05-20 01:35:27 <jgarzik> two kitchen sinks should be sufficient
 190 2012-05-20 01:35:50 <BlueMatt> I dont see how wallets are in the cblockstore kitchen sink?
 191 2012-05-20 01:35:51 <jgarzik> luke-jr: I dunno if you saw, but I just rebased extra-abort / dbenv / blockindex
 192 2012-05-20 01:35:53 c_k has quit (Quit: c_k)
 193 2012-05-20 01:36:13 RainbowDashh has joined
 194 2012-05-20 01:36:24 <BlueMatt> also, digging a bit, it looks like testing may get updated soon, the non-supported big-edian archs have been removed from testing, see: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=672802
 195 2012-05-20 01:36:41 <sipa> jgarzik: wallets send transactions to network and blockchain, network sends messages to blockchain and wallets, wallet requests data from blockchain; those are for me enough to state that wallet/net/blockchain ought to communicate through one interface
 196 2012-05-20 01:36:42 <luke-jr> jgarzik: yep
 197 2012-05-20 01:36:55 <luke-jr> jgarzik: finishing up a new next-test build with those rebased versions
 198 2012-05-20 01:37:13 merde has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 199 2012-05-20 01:37:25 <sipa> jgarzik: it's possible to separate network from that and put it behind the blockchain; i'm not sure which is best, but that is certainly reasonable
 200 2012-05-20 01:37:46 <sipa> jgarzik: but i do not consider that idea a kitchen sink
 201 2012-05-20 01:38:03 <sipa> just a fixed interface through which those services communicate
 202 2012-05-20 01:38:49 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: any idea why they forgot to remove sparc64 hppa powerpcspe ? or what problem kfreebsd-i386 has with 0.6.1+?
 203 2012-05-20 01:38:55 <jgarzik> sipa: network sends messages to blockchain server, which may be providing services for one or more wallets
 204 2012-05-20 01:39:03 <luke-jr> http://packages.debian.org/sid/bitcoind
 205 2012-05-20 01:39:12 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: nfc
 206 2012-05-20 01:39:19 merde has joined
 207 2012-05-20 01:39:20 <sipa> jgarzik: as i said, that is a reasonable alternative
 208 2012-05-20 01:39:21 <jgarzik> sipa: network may be entirely encapsulated within "blockchain server" concept, and need not be a separate entity (gmaxwell convinced me of this yesterday on IRC)
 209 2012-05-20 01:39:30 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: arent their buillogs public?
 210 2012-05-20 01:39:59 <luke-jr> hmm, not sure
 211 2012-05-20 01:40:11 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: also, do our unit tests fail on BE?  e.g. do any try to validate the genesis block (I know that fails on BE)
 212 2012-05-20 01:40:29 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: they do fail, that's why 0.4.0 wasn't allowed into testing
 213 2012-05-20 01:40:33 <gmaxwell> If so we should try to get debian to run the tests after build so they'll stop thinking that BE works.
 214 2012-05-20 01:40:37 <gmaxwell> ah!
 215 2012-05-20 01:40:54 <gmaxwell> hilarious.
 216 2012-05-20 01:41:16 * BlueMatt still prefers the idea of splitting off network from chain manage, as i could see it being very useful to run chain manager on another server from p2p client
 217 2012-05-20 01:41:19 * jgarzik was thinking that the code shouldn't be -too- difficult to convert to fixed-bytesex
 218 2012-05-20 01:41:36 <jgarzik> serialize stuff is already pretty regimented
 219 2012-05-20 01:41:52 <sipa> BlueMatt: yes, that would be very nice, but that wouldn't be P2P protocol in between them
 220 2012-05-20 01:42:52 <jgarzik> the conceptual model of RPC and UI being clients of the internal chain server and wallet server(s) seems effective and powerful
 221 2012-05-20 01:43:13 * jgarzik started from the other end last night, converting bitcoinrpc.cpp into something that talks to either server
 222 2012-05-20 01:43:16 <sipa> jgarzik: absolutely, no discussion about that
 223 2012-05-20 01:43:17 <luke-jr> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=bitcoin&arch=kfreebsd-i386&ver=0.6.2.2-1&stamp=1337043580
 224 2012-05-20 01:43:28 <BlueMatt> sipa: doesnt really matter much to me what protocol would be between them, Im thinking of cblockstore as where one would split bitcoin if it were split into separate processes.  If I were running a huge bitcoin exchange, and it were an option, I would prefer to have p2p client outside my firewall, and then just a pinhole to the chain storage manager, to multiple p2p clients, ie one with a publicly released ip, others without
 225 2012-05-20 01:43:31 <luke-jr> it seems somehow the test suite is failing to find the script json files on bsd
 226 2012-05-20 01:43:33 tower has joined
 227 2012-05-20 01:45:58 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 228 2012-05-20 01:47:30 <sipa> gmaxwell: sounds like you would want to comment on BlueMatt's idea, then
 229 2012-05-20 01:48:32 eian has joined
 230 2012-05-20 01:49:12 b4epoche has joined
 231 2012-05-20 01:53:13 eian has quit (Client Quit)
 232 2012-05-20 01:53:40 vragnaroda has quit (Quit: Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do, and they will surprise you with their ingenuity. -- G.S. Patton)
 233 2012-05-20 01:54:47 <sipa> one argument in favor of not hiding network behind blockchain, is if someday memory pool management gets split from blockchain management
 234 2012-05-20 01:55:29 <sipa> one could run a blockchain somewhere in the network, and have several wallet-handler machines connected to it, but each wallet handler has its own memory pool
 235 2012-05-20 01:56:52 <sipa> apart from that, i'm not sure, and putting network behind chainmgmt feels easier
 236 2012-05-20 01:57:59 <sipa> that said, cblockstore could evolve to just be the message dispatcher between wallets and blockchain
 237 2012-05-20 01:58:23 <sipa> and that's certainly easier to implement
 238 2012-05-20 02:00:38 <BlueMatt> Im not actually so sure putting network behind chain mgmt is easier, its quite trivial to split the two
 239 2012-05-20 02:01:50 <sipa> not that part, but if network is behind the chain, the chain doesn't need to be a normal client to hub - it could be just the hub itself
 240 2012-05-20 02:01:55 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 241 2012-05-20 02:03:05 skeledrew has joined
 242 2012-05-20 02:04:08 shadders has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 243 2012-05-20 02:04:21 <BlueMatt> the chain can be the bug itself either way?
 244 2012-05-20 02:04:29 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
 245 2012-05-20 02:04:37 <BlueMatt> s/bug/hub/
 246 2012-05-20 02:04:52 <sipa> yeah, true
 247 2012-05-20 02:05:28 <sipa> except if you want to have nodes communicate over an internal network
 248 2012-05-20 02:05:39 <sipa> in that case, those other nodes need to run a blockchainless hub
 249 2012-05-20 02:06:33 <BlueMatt> wait, are you saying 1 p2p client, multiple chains, multiple wallets?
 250 2012-05-20 02:06:42 <sipa> no
 251 2012-05-20 02:06:59 <BlueMatt> define nodes, in this case
 252 2012-05-20 02:07:02 <sipa> any number of p2p clients, one chain, any number of wallets
 253 2012-05-20 02:07:05 <sipa> nodes = machines
 254 2012-05-20 02:07:18 Smoovious has left ()
 255 2012-05-20 02:07:35 <sipa> each node would have its own hub, and the hubs exchange messages with eachother
 256 2012-05-20 02:07:42 <BlueMatt> why do you need a chainless hub?
 257 2012-05-20 02:08:04 <BlueMatt> or, each node has a proxy hub, which just forwards requests to the real blockstore hub?
 258 2012-05-20 02:08:14 <BlueMatt> ^ the design goal, in the end, is to support that
 259 2012-05-20 02:08:17 <sipa> yes, i call both hubs
 260 2012-05-20 02:08:27 <BlueMatt> oh
 261 2012-05-20 02:08:35 <sipa> and if the chain is a regular hub client, that's trivial
 262 2012-05-20 02:08:49 <sipa> if the chain is special, there is a different between real hub and proxy hub
 263 2012-05-20 02:09:43 <jgarzik> well
 264 2012-05-20 02:10:14 devrando1 has joined
 265 2012-05-20 02:10:14 c_k has joined
 266 2012-05-20 02:10:18 <sipa> but that doesn't really matter right now
 267 2012-05-20 02:10:28 <BlueMatt> that gets significantly messier, though, what if you have two chain clients with different chains? and if you require only one chain-storing hub client, how is that different from a hub that contains a chain?
 268 2012-05-20 02:10:29 <jgarzik> personally I think BlueMatt's idea bout the network is a great one :)  dunno if it is necessarily the best choice for the current client -- though it might be.  long time down the road, though.
 269 2012-05-20 02:10:43 c_k has left ()
 270 2012-05-20 02:10:49 <jgarzik> the reason why I like it in general:  that's how I'm cloud-ifying bitcoin anyway, in a separate project
 271 2012-05-20 02:11:25 * jgarzik is just throwing stuff into a cloud filesystem right now + separate key server + separate p2p network server
 272 2012-05-20 02:11:27 <sipa> jgarzik: so, do you now see why you would want to make the p2p service a client to the hub, rather than behind the blockstore?
 273 2012-05-20 02:11:29 * BlueMatt finds it could offer significantly better security through process separation, for those who have the hardware/need for that kind of security on top of security on top of security
 274 2012-05-20 02:11:58 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 275 2012-05-20 02:12:02 <jgarzik> key server is where I store the wallet stuff, though roles are split between generation and storage
 276 2012-05-20 02:12:31 <jgarzik> p2p is based on artforz' half a node, but doesn't do much more than it already does (speak p2p, verify blocks without db assistance)
 277 2012-05-20 02:13:42 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: I would love to see process separation
 278 2012-05-20 02:13:42 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 279 2012-05-20 02:13:44 <sipa> so, you're against a "kitchen sink", but are building a system where exactly the same services with similar messages all communicate with eachother?
 280 2012-05-20 02:14:24 <luke-jr> jgarzik: where is the main branch to the blockchain upgrade?
 281 2012-05-20 02:14:27 <jgarzik> four little servers each heavily firewalled into their own walled garden is 180 degrees different from a kitchen sink
 282 2012-05-20 02:14:33 <luke-jr> I need to move it after the wallet loading or it crashes
 283 2012-05-20 02:15:37 <jgarzik> luke-jr: the branch chain looks like:  extra-abort -> dbenv -> blockindex.  each is separate pull requests, built on top of one another
 284 2012-05-20 02:15:49 <luke-jr> jgarzik: yes, I mean in the code itself
 285 2012-05-20 02:16:29 <jgarzik> luke-jr: then I am not sure what you mean by "main branch"  the upgrade is initiated in init.cpp, right before -loadblock handling
 286 2012-05-20 02:16:39 * BlueMatt still fails to see how cblockstore is a kitchen sink, its a chain server + hub to allow wallet/p2p to communicate with the chain server, wallet/p2p never communicate through it (aside from through the chain server part), and the things like callbacks to wallet during chain processing arent there because I like them, they are there because I wanted to keep cblockstore identical to master, for the most part, and then make it clean later
 287 2012-05-20 02:17:17 <luke-jr> aha, found it
 288 2012-05-20 02:17:24 shadders has joined
 289 2012-05-20 02:17:31 <luke-jr> I was confusing main.cpp with init.cpp somehow, so looking in the wrong file
 290 2012-05-20 02:17:40 <sipa> jgarzik: cblockstore is the chain server; cblockstore's clients will be wallets and p2p nodes - they talk to the chainserver via a very tightly controlled interface
 291 2012-05-20 02:18:17 <sipa> jgarzik: those clients (wallets and p2p nodes) can later potentially be moved to other processes, or other machines
 292 2012-05-20 02:18:25 <jgarzik> cblockstore's clients should be wallet, RPC, UI not P2P
 293 2012-05-20 02:18:34 <jgarzik> if cblockstore == chain server
 294 2012-05-20 02:18:35 <sipa> NO
 295 2012-05-20 02:18:47 <sipa> it is absolutely not about wallet/RPC/UI communication
 296 2012-05-20 02:18:59 <sipa> though a similar design may be useful there
 297 2012-05-20 02:18:59 <moa7> is this something like a block-only node?
 298 2012-05-20 02:19:04 <sipa> but that is another layer entirely
 299 2012-05-20 02:19:30 <luke-jr> http://codepad.org/ZuSdFtUA <-- what i meant, and would prefer to see mainlined @jgarzik @sipa
 300 2012-05-20 02:19:54 <sipa> jgarzik: how can you call it a kitchen sink, but at the same time argue for even more functionality to be routed through it?
 301 2012-05-20 02:20:36 ahbritto_ has joined
 302 2012-05-20 02:20:47 <jgarzik> sipa: I think there are about a dozen parallel sub-arguments at this point
 303 2012-05-20 02:20:48 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: I dont see why p2p cant be a client, it should eventually take no additional api in blockstore.h (though it does currently) to have p2p a client to blockstore, and it takes only a few lines change in p2p code to make it a client, also, making it a client gets rid of some of the ugly global mess, so...
 304 2012-05-20 02:21:04 <jgarzik> luke-jr: why?
 305 2012-05-20 02:21:05 ahbritto_ is now known as Guest13984
 306 2012-05-20 02:22:28 <jgarzik> luke-jr: it makes little sense to put block chain import AFTER functions like wallet rescan, which need a block chain
 307 2012-05-20 02:22:36 <jgarzik> luke-jr: what is the real problem you are seeing?
 308 2012-05-20 02:22:41 RainbowDashh has joined
 309 2012-05-20 02:22:51 <sipa> jgarzik: except for a few things like current block height, i don't see why UI and RPC should be talking to the blockchain at all
 310 2012-05-20 02:23:12 RainbowDashh has quit (Client Quit)
 311 2012-05-20 02:23:16 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: thats very unrelated to cblockstore, thats in master, and can be fixed in like 10 minutes...
 312 2012-05-20 02:23:16 <luke-jr> jgarzik: updating the blockchain should update the wallet too
 313 2012-05-20 02:23:33 <luke-jr> jgarzik: the real problem to me, is that my AcceptToMemoryPool accesses my wallet
 314 2012-05-20 02:23:47 <luke-jr> so the first reorg crashes since it isn't loaded
 315 2012-05-20 02:24:03 <jgarzik> sipa: there is no reason why UI and RPC cannot query the block chain for any and all information the user finds useful
 316 2012-05-20 02:24:09 <jgarzik> it's just a database
 317 2012-05-20 02:24:22 <sipa> jgarzik: ok, sure, so connect them to the chain for those
 318 2012-05-20 02:24:34 <sipa> but UI/RPC communication with wallets should not be via the hub
 319 2012-05-20 02:24:35 RainbowDashh has joined
 320 2012-05-20 02:25:02 <sipa> (i assumed that's what you meant by connecting UI and RPC as clients to it, but maybe i misunderstood)
 321 2012-05-20 02:25:08 osmosis has joined
 322 2012-05-20 02:25:40 <sipa> nothing on the hub-network is private, but everything is trusted
 323 2012-05-20 02:26:24 * sipa needs sleep
 324 2012-05-20 02:26:30 moa7 has left ()
 325 2012-05-20 02:26:33 <BlueMatt> Im right behind you, there
 326 2012-05-20 02:27:10 <jgarzik> I think we all do :)  /me was up watching the non-launch at 4:55am local
 327 2012-05-20 02:27:35 * jgarzik will show with code on Monday/Tuesday.  Sometimes that's much better than English
 328 2012-05-20 02:28:01 * BlueMatt waits to see code, and puts off rebasing cblockstore until the discussions are concluding
 329 2012-05-20 02:28:25 <sipa> ok
 330 2012-05-20 02:28:28 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: well at the moment it sounds like I'm outvoted by sipa and gmaxwell...
 331 2012-05-20 02:28:45 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: still, if your code is amazing, votes can change quick ;)
 332 2012-05-20 02:29:06 <sipa> jgarzik: the reason i'm agitated about it, is that it feels like you somehow fail to see the idea behind it
 333 2012-05-20 02:29:17 <luke-jr> XD
 334 2012-05-20 02:29:47 <sipa> while it sounds very much like (the early stage of) the chain server you talk about
 335 2012-05-20 02:29:58 <sipa> but maybe code will clarify :)
 336 2012-05-20 02:29:59 <nanotube> y'all can always sleep on it and reconvene tomorrow. :)
 337 2012-05-20 02:30:53 <BlueMatt> yea...when its starting to get light out, and Im not in bed, I think thats a bad sign
 338 2012-05-20 02:31:15 <sipa> nanotube: good idea!
 339 2012-05-20 02:31:24 <nanotube> :)
 340 2012-05-20 02:33:31 tower has joined
 341 2012-05-20 02:40:37 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 342 2012-05-20 02:43:04 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 343 2012-05-20 02:43:13 [7] has joined
 344 2012-05-20 02:53:23 * gmaxwell looks at scrollback
 345 2012-05-20 02:54:26 <gmaxwell> I don't think thats splitting the chain and the network will ultimately make sense— (what, will you speak the bitcoin p2p network bettween them? :) simply translate protocol to protocol?)   But I don't think thats really a comment on what cblockstore does—
 346 2012-05-20 02:55:08 <gmaxwell> You have some hub that splits block and network _internally_ and thats fine. Then only the wallet gets shimmed on a socket.  If later you really do decide that you want to seperate the p2p network, then you're free to or not.
 347 2012-05-20 02:57:05 vragnaroda has joined
 348 2012-05-20 03:02:48 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: if you want to have additional security you can run a p2p<->p2p proxy—  and in fact I think that the current best practice is to use a node(s) with no coin on it as a bastion host. It's what I do, and I assume everyone doing serious things with bitcoin does too.
 349 2012-05-20 03:03:03 <gmaxwell> doing so strongly insulates you from dos attacks.
 350 2012-05-20 03:04:25 Geebus is now known as Geebus|AFK
 351 2012-05-20 03:05:31 tower has joined
 352 2012-05-20 03:08:19 <jgarzik> yes, bastion nodes are standard practice afaik
 353 2012-05-20 03:18:03 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 354 2012-05-20 03:21:53 da2ce7 has joined
 355 2012-05-20 03:30:20 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 356 2012-05-20 03:34:04 <luke-jr> sigh
 357 2012-05-20 03:34:19 <luke-jr> surely there should be a much faster way to upgrade the blockchain than loadblock?
 358 2012-05-20 03:34:27 <luke-jr> ie, skip all verification entirely?
 359 2012-05-20 03:35:00 smtmnyz has joined
 360 2012-05-20 03:35:00 <luke-jr> maybe even symlink the data file and copy indexes…
 361 2012-05-20 03:36:55 <luke-jr> (in fact, if we save the "last seen position" in blk000x.dat, we can automatically "load" whatever is added by old clients…)
 362 2012-05-20 03:39:40 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: well, we really do want to revalidate it— simply because there may be nodes with broken crap in them that we'd like to clean out.
 363 2012-05-20 03:40:12 <gmaxwell> we should however get the validation going as fast as possible.
 364 2012-05-20 03:40:44 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 365 2012-05-20 03:43:15 mmoya_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 366 2012-05-20 03:50:34 Lexa has quit (Quit: Lexa)
 367 2012-05-20 03:52:01 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I think we can revalidate read-only, only building the index…
 368 2012-05-20 03:52:51 <luke-jr> I daresay the best for compatibility is to allow blk0001.dat to be outside the subdirectory, if it already exists, and just put the new index in there
 369 2012-05-20 03:53:49 <gmaxwell> I mean we could just build the index then move it— but I don't want to test _two_ sorts of block loading mechenisms.
 370 2012-05-20 03:56:11 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 371 2012-05-20 03:57:25 <luke-jr> moving it means old versions need to redownload
 372 2012-05-20 03:58:30 <gmaxwell> yes, once the update completes successfully.
 373 2012-05-20 03:58:33 <luke-jr> we could make it so -loadblock simply cat's the file to blk*.dat and uses the load-in-place ;)
 374 2012-05-20 03:59:21 <gmaxwell> load in place would be a very different thing though— the purpose of loadblock is to be identical to loading from the network so we can use it to QA and benchmark validation.
 375 2012-05-20 03:59:29 <gmaxwell> a loadblockinplace wouldn't be as good for that.
 376 2012-05-20 04:00:51 barmstro_ has joined
 377 2012-05-20 04:00:52 barmstrong has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 378 2012-05-20 04:01:05 <luke-jr> well, loadblock/from-network is almost already load-in-place right now
 379 2012-05-20 04:02:09 <luke-jr> there's just no code to scan data already on disk, rather than data *just written*
 380 2012-05-20 04:02:29 <luke-jr> implementing it is pretty much a matter of identifying the position of the block on disk
 381 2012-05-20 04:02:32 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 382 2012-05-20 04:03:02 <luke-jr> (and tolerating blk0001.dat being outside the subdir)
 383 2012-05-20 04:04:48 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 03:41:51 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=000000000000050216cd  height=
 384 2012-05-20 04:04:48 <jgarzik> 180846  work=329111878961760555018
 385 2012-05-20 04:04:48 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 03:41:51 InvalidChainFound:  current best=00000000000000668f94  height=
 386 2012-05-20 04:04:48 <jgarzik> 173928  work=281572770189269801333
 387 2012-05-20 04:04:58 <jgarzik> something remains screwy in #blockindex
 388 2012-05-20 04:05:41 <luke-jr> jgarzik: thoughts on tolerating blk0001.dat in its current location and just reindexing it?
 389 2012-05-20 04:06:12 localhost has joined
 390 2012-05-20 04:07:35 tower has joined
 391 2012-05-20 04:08:12 <jgarzik> luke-jr: 3 lines of code to do it this way, or many many untested lines of code to reindex
 392 2012-05-20 04:09:20 <luke-jr> shouldn't be that many to reindex, I think
 393 2012-05-20 04:11:03 <luke-jr> benefits: much faster upgrade, much less disk space wasted on upgrade, much less having the disk read+write to the same partition, better backward compatibility :p
 394 2012-05-20 04:11:14 * luke-jr is still waiting for his upgrading node
 395 2012-05-20 04:11:34 <jgarzik> luke-jr: some of those benefits exist, yes.  this is known.
 396 2012-05-20 04:11:49 <jgarzik> luke-jr: blockchain stuffs are moving to blockchain/ though, including blk????.dat
 397 2012-05-20 04:12:13 <luke-jr> jgarzik: no reason not to use blk0001.dat outside that dir, if it already exists…?
 398 2012-05-20 04:12:58 <jgarzik> luke-jr: no, we will ONLY use blockchain/blk????.dat
 399 2012-05-20 04:13:09 <jgarzik> luke-jr: a proper reindex solution would move said file(s)
 400 2012-05-20 04:13:38 <luke-jr> jgarzik: what possible benefit is there that outweighs all the reasons not to?
 401 2012-05-20 04:13:47 <luke-jr> afaict, that's just an aesthetic thing
 402 2012-05-20 04:15:00 <jgarzik> luke-jr: there are no "all the reasons not to", once file-move is added to equation
 403 2012-05-20 04:16:58 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: so what happens if the reindex gets 50% through and fails? should there by 600mb of junk data in the middle of your block file forever?
 404 2012-05-20 04:17:06 <luke-jr> file-move completely breaks other versions
 405 2012-05-20 04:17:23 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 406 2012-05-20 04:17:34 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: we're going to delete the old index anyways, I assume, otherise we're going leave many hundreds of megs of junk behind.
 407 2012-05-20 04:17:35 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's one reason why the block index should keep track of the most recent position it is in the file, so it can scan new data it hasn't seen before
 408 2012-05-20 04:18:30 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: we already have a ~bug due to the tracking it already does. ... if you poweroff while syncing you fail on startup because the last block in the index didn't make it onto disk.
 409 2012-05-20 04:18:47 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's not tracking, it's lack thereof
 410 2012-05-20 04:19:09 <gmaxwell> Its tracking— just failing to gracefully handle the case when the file is smaller than the 'tracked' size. :)
 411 2012-05-20 04:19:44 * luke-jr wonders if there's a chance the file isn't smaller, but contains garbage data in the end ;)
 412 2012-05-20 04:20:03 <gmaxwell> no it's smaller, it tries to seek past the end.
 413 2012-05-20 04:20:05 Fnar has joined
 414 2012-05-20 04:20:17 <gmaxwell> It might _also_ have junk, but it doesn't get that far. It seeks and the seek fails.
 415 2012-05-20 04:20:29 Fnar has quit (Changing host)
 416 2012-05-20 04:20:29 Fnar has joined
 417 2012-05-20 04:20:36 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it's smaller in that case;  but what if the filesystem wrote the size/allocation before the new data?
 418 2012-05-20 04:21:11 <gmaxwell> We might even handle that case more gracefully.
 419 2012-05-20 04:21:31 <luke-jr> anyhow, if moving the block index creates problems switching to older versions, I don't see any reason to do it
 420 2012-05-20 04:21:45 <gmaxwell> there is _nothing_ that won't create problems mixing with older versions.
 421 2012-05-20 04:22:05 <gmaxwell> even in the most compatible case you're going to waste a ton of diskspace, especially if someone actually starts an older version.
 422 2012-05-20 04:22:13 <gmaxwell> (which will then duplicate a bunch of blocks)
 423 2012-05-20 04:22:30 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if the existing index and data is left in place, old versions continue to work…
 424 2012-05-20 04:23:04 <gmaxwell> you'll end up with duplicate data— any blocks the new downloads will get downloaded again. (even if the new knows to reindex ones the old added)
 425 2012-05-20 04:23:28 <luke-jr> not if the new one is using the old index for stuff the old version indexed.
 426 2012-05-20 04:23:30 <gmaxwell> better to do the upgrade... and leave the files as an option... and just let new and old have seperate blockchains (don't do the upgrade again if its already done)
 427 2012-05-20 04:23:58 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: The old one will append to the end of the blockfile causing duplication. Becuase even if you make the new one smart that doesn't change the old one.
 428 2012-05-20 04:24:06 * luke-jr admits he doesn't know the background reason for this change in the first place
 429 2012-05-20 04:24:37 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: the old one will just work with the blocks downloaded by the new one, if the new one continues to use the old index for the same stuff
 430 2012-05-20 04:25:24 <luke-jr> is there some problem with the old index itself?
 431 2012-05-20 04:25:25 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: it should make the blockchain database faster, by not stuffing everything in one table and making us use a btree index for things that should be hashtables.
 432 2012-05-20 04:25:34 <luke-jr> hmm
 433 2012-05-20 04:27:08 <luke-jr> OK, yeah, I can't think of a good solution if we really need to abandon the old index and jgarzik is going to do an OS-move on the data file anyway
 434 2012-05-20 04:27:11 tower has joined
 435 2012-05-20 04:28:40 <jgarzik> luke-jr: no, I was saying only that -if- the solution is import old-bdb to new-bdb directly (it is _not_, currently), then file move would likely be used
 436 2012-05-20 04:28:46 <luke-jr> if it takes long, though, we might find users more willing to redownload from scratch than upgrade, since they can still use the client while it downloads
 437 2012-05-20 04:28:51 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 438 2012-05-20 04:29:05 <jgarzik> luke-jr: the current solution works for downgrades as well as upgrades, because the old data is not removed or touched
 439 2012-05-20 04:29:24 <jgarzik> luke-jr: any file-move or file-delete scheme kills downgrade
 440 2012-05-20 04:30:30 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: have looked to see if the hash table databases are smaller?
 441 2012-05-20 04:31:17 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: not yet... still chasing bugs
 442 2012-05-20 04:32:22 <luke-jr> hmm
 443 2012-05-20 04:32:24 <luke-jr> Reorg failure
 444 2012-05-20 04:32:52 eoss has joined
 445 2012-05-20 04:32:52 eoss has quit (Changing host)
 446 2012-05-20 04:32:52 eoss has joined
 447 2012-05-20 04:32:54 <luke-jr> jgarzik: ah, is this stuff not really ready for testing yet?
 448 2012-05-20 04:33:43 <jgarzik> luke-jr:  dev testing yes, wide user testing no
 449 2012-05-20 04:33:54 <luke-jr> i c
 450 2012-05-20 04:34:11 wizkid057 has joined
 451 2012-05-20 04:34:11 wizkid057 has quit (Changing host)
 452 2012-05-20 04:34:11 wizkid057 has joined
 453 2012-05-20 04:34:30 <jgarzik> luke-jr: it would not even be a pull request, except to get review of the general approach ("do we want to do this?")
 454 2012-05-20 04:41:58 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 455 2012-05-20 04:42:14 <jgarzik> Interesting contention about GPUMAX: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82560.0
 456 2012-05-20 04:43:29 <jgarzik> (I'm not claiming there is -any- evidence, but it has always been theoretical possibility for GPUMAX)
 457 2012-05-20 04:52:16 eoss has joined
 458 2012-05-20 04:52:16 eoss has quit (Changing host)
 459 2012-05-20 04:52:16 eoss has joined
 460 2012-05-20 04:54:07 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: well, it's pretty easy to look at the coins that are paid to gpumax users— the ones I've seen are old with complicated transaction histories.  I'd just taken that all to be an open secret.
 461 2012-05-20 04:54:47 <gmaxwell> What I don't understand is why bitcoin users go along with it. God knows I wouldn't want to be the target of some investigation because I used some coins that had just been run through some undergrouns site.
 462 2012-05-20 04:55:17 <gmaxwell> I ... hope ... bitcoin users are smart enough to smell the fishy smell when someone gives you $2 in exchange for giving them $1.
 463 2012-05-20 05:01:33 <gmaxwell> interesting: bitcoinica hacker is in #bitcoin giving out 1-2btc to random people.
 464 2012-05-20 05:09:53 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
 465 2012-05-20 05:11:12 Geebus is now known as AFK!43a8f7a7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.67.168.247.167|Geebus
 466 2012-05-20 05:11:48 Slix` has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 467 2012-05-20 05:15:00 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: sadly, people seem to feel the need to relearn every in-the-flesh lesson they've ever learn, in the bitcoin virtual-money world
 468 2012-05-20 05:15:36 <jgarzik> at least that's my cynical observation over the past couple years...
 469 2012-05-20 05:18:36 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 470 2012-05-20 05:28:21 <gmaxwell> I sense that the need for merging coincontrol has just gone up ten fold.
 471 2012-05-20 05:28:45 <copumpkin> lol
 472 2012-05-20 05:29:55 meLon has joined
 473 2012-05-20 05:30:45 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 474 2012-05-20 05:41:30 zeiris has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 475 2012-05-20 05:44:20 eoss has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 476 2012-05-20 05:48:45 Karmaon is now known as Karmaon2
 477 2012-05-20 05:48:57 Karmaon2 is now known as Karmaon
 478 2012-05-20 05:49:09 tower has joined
 479 2012-05-20 05:50:28 zeiris has joined
 480 2012-05-20 06:02:02 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 481 2012-05-20 06:03:46 b4epoche has joined
 482 2012-05-20 06:25:25 Garr255Mobi has joined
 483 2012-05-20 06:32:02 davout_ has joined
 484 2012-05-20 06:42:03 <midnightmagic> something that creates a break in the transaction history with an escrow + opentransactions might be able to help with dirty history contamination. it's good in one way that tracking dirty coins is possible, but.. it's not helpful long-term. :-/
 485 2012-05-20 06:43:07 Garr255Mobi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 486 2012-05-20 06:46:33 meLon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 487 2012-05-20 06:58:21 Rag is now known as Sleeping!~kvirc@unaffiliated/ragnarok752|Ragnarok752
 488 2012-05-20 07:01:08 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 489 2012-05-20 07:03:22 JZavala has joined
 490 2012-05-20 07:05:58 RazielZ has joined
 491 2012-05-20 07:17:46 guruvan has quit (Quit: Later!)
 492 2012-05-20 07:19:05 guruvan has joined
 493 2012-05-20 07:20:26 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 494 2012-05-20 07:27:17 <jgarzik> sigh
 495 2012-05-20 07:27:59 <jgarzik> block chain download succeeds, continuing past block 173928, on #blockindex
 496 2012-05-20 07:28:27 <jgarzik> LoadExternalBlockFile() fails for reasons mentioned previously (blocks after 173928 refuse to connect)
 497 2012-05-20 07:28:32 <jgarzik> strange
 498 2012-05-20 07:32:58 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 499 2012-05-20 07:33:31 copumpkin has joined
 500 2012-05-20 07:33:56 erle- has joined
 501 2012-05-20 07:35:43 Ragnarok752 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 502 2012-05-20 07:42:47 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 503 2012-05-20 07:52:54 stalled has joined
 504 2012-05-20 07:54:59 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 505 2012-05-20 07:58:04 xenland has joined
 506 2012-05-20 07:59:10 Garr255Mobi has joined
 507 2012-05-20 08:13:04 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 508 2012-05-20 08:14:10 Garr255Mobi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 509 2012-05-20 08:25:47 davout_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 510 2012-05-20 08:27:05 davout has joined
 511 2012-05-20 08:36:10 yellowhat has joined
 512 2012-05-20 08:44:45 one_zero has joined
 513 2012-05-20 08:56:25 paraipan has joined
 514 2012-05-20 08:59:19 da2ce7 has joined
 515 2012-05-20 09:03:20 ThomasV has joined
 516 2012-05-20 09:09:35 Turingi has joined
 517 2012-05-20 09:15:05 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
 518 2012-05-20 09:21:49 molecular has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 519 2012-05-20 09:22:34 molecular has joined
 520 2012-05-20 09:23:22 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 521 2012-05-20 09:24:07 one_zero has quit ()
 522 2012-05-20 09:27:05 one_zero has joined
 523 2012-05-20 09:28:56 osmosis has joined
 524 2012-05-20 09:30:38 darkee has joined
 525 2012-05-20 10:00:34 Fanquake has joined
 526 2012-05-20 10:05:01 datagutt has joined
 527 2012-05-20 10:08:18 Fanquake_ has joined
 528 2012-05-20 10:11:10 Fanquake has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 529 2012-05-20 10:11:13 Fanquake_ is now known as Fanquake
 530 2012-05-20 10:11:42 Fanquake has quit (Client Quit)
 531 2012-05-20 10:15:48 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 532 2012-05-20 10:16:51 mxmxmx has joined
 533 2012-05-20 10:18:29 b4epoche has joined
 534 2012-05-20 10:34:29 RazielZ has joined
 535 2012-05-20 10:44:19 cdecker has joined
 536 2012-05-20 10:50:13 darkskiez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 537 2012-05-20 11:01:44 ovidiusoft has joined
 538 2012-05-20 11:10:59 TD has joined
 539 2012-05-20 11:11:13 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 540 2012-05-20 11:13:06 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 541 2012-05-20 11:23:55 mmoya_ has joined
 542 2012-05-20 11:30:37 Stellar has joined
 543 2012-05-20 11:41:39 hazek has joined
 544 2012-05-20 11:47:40 <sipa> jgarzik: refuse to connect because of what error?
 545 2012-05-20 11:48:40 <hazek> anyone in here willing to help out a noob with pgp?
 546 2012-05-20 11:48:49 <hazek> well not really a noob
 547 2012-05-20 11:48:54 <hazek> but just have 1 small problem
 548 2012-05-20 11:51:10 <sipa> hazek: shoot
 549 2012-05-20 11:51:23 <hazek> i tried to import a public key
 550 2012-05-20 11:51:36 <hazek> I copied the gpg key, made a txt file on my desktop, pasted your key, saved, went into gpg4win, tried to import and it tells me there are no gpg keys in that file
 551 2012-05-20 11:51:42 <hazek> did I do something wrong?
 552 2012-05-20 11:51:56 <hazek> pasted the pgp key*
 553 2012-05-20 11:52:27 <sipa> what is "copied the gpg key" ?
 554 2012-05-20 11:52:51 <hazek> someone had it publicly displayed in a thread on the forum
 555 2012-05-20 11:53:05 <hazek> so I selected all of it and c/ped it into a txt file
 556 2012-05-20 11:53:31 <hazek> isn't that what I'm suppose to do?
 557 2012-05-20 11:53:40 <sipa> yes, that should work
 558 2012-05-20 11:53:46 <hazek> it doesn't
 559 2012-05-20 11:53:59 <hazek> gnu says there was no gpg key found
 560 2012-05-20 11:54:20 <sipa> the text file looks like:
 561 2012-05-20 11:54:21 <sipa> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
 562 2012-05-20 11:54:21 <sipa> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
 563 2012-05-20 11:54:21 <sipa> mQINBEjFMM8BEACnNnUTitrKbnIJTn5AskVVI0ZkauuTgmBLSFESa1q4vCG2XFOj
 564 2012-05-20 11:54:23 <sipa> ?
 565 2012-05-20 11:54:25 <hazek> yes
 566 2012-05-20 11:59:16 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 567 2012-05-20 12:26:14 Diapolo has joined
 568 2012-05-20 12:32:20 Joric has joined
 569 2012-05-20 12:36:12 dvide has quit ()
 570 2012-05-20 12:41:23 PK has joined
 571 2012-05-20 12:47:58 da2ce7 has joined
 572 2012-05-20 12:48:01 Nicksasa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 573 2012-05-20 12:48:09 Nicksasa has joined
 574 2012-05-20 12:48:09 Nicksasa has quit (Changing host)
 575 2012-05-20 12:48:09 Nicksasa has joined
 576 2012-05-20 12:49:49 <amiller> hey i think i found a good match for bitcoin in the theoretical fault tolerance literature http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.897/fall04/papers/Dwork/consensus-in-ps.pdf
 577 2012-05-20 12:50:19 <amiller> this is the 'partial synchrony' model where there is a fixed upper bound on the delays for messages, but it's not known ahead of time
 578 2012-05-20 12:51:01 <amiller> there's a lower bound proof in this paper for 3f+1, or "the 34% attack" in bitcoin speak
 579 2012-05-20 12:53:02 <amiller> and bitcoin achieves this bound in this model using only a slight modification, where you store a longest chain for each bit of hash collision (as opposed to having a sliding scale difficulty)
 580 2012-05-20 13:01:33 [Tycho] has joined
 581 2012-05-20 13:02:24 <[Tycho]> What's wrong with sipa's site ?
 582 2012-05-20 13:03:29 <sipa> [Tycho]: good question, better ask him!
 583 2012-05-20 13:05:07 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: agreed, whether you use a p2p proxying node (with or without chain) or not, its the same basic idea...but, yea I just dont see the reason to not split up p2p and blockchain in the current system, as they are so easy to split and it makes for cleaner code
 584 2012-05-20 13:07:43 devrandom has joined
 585 2012-05-20 13:08:07 <BlueMatt> though, I dont see why a blockstore/hub needs to keep a list of peers, or do any of the 100 other things a p2p client needs to do that a hub/blockstore doesnt
 586 2012-05-20 13:10:13 devrando1 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 587 2012-05-20 13:10:55 <BlueMatt> anyway, thats far down the road and I dont think its entirely relevant to the current discussion on cblockstore, the split of p2p/blockstore there is more of a "its so easy to do, and makes the code so much cleaner..." kinda thing
 588 2012-05-20 13:11:32 <sipa> agree; let's focus in chain-wallets interaction first
 589 2012-05-20 13:11:35 <sipa> *on
 590 2012-05-20 13:12:30 <sipa> but i don't think it's implementaion-wise hard to make p2p nodes function in almost entirely the same fashion
 591 2012-05-20 13:13:28 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 592 2012-05-20 13:17:48 darkee has joined
 593 2012-05-20 13:26:53 eoss has joined
 594 2012-05-20 13:27:14 Diapolo has left ()
 595 2012-05-20 13:36:39 eoss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 596 2012-05-20 13:44:01 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 597 2012-05-20 13:46:55 <Eliel> are there any developments going on about bitcoin foundation?
 598 2012-05-20 13:47:32 <BlueMatt> I would ask when gavin is online...
 599 2012-05-20 13:47:32 shadders has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 600 2012-05-20 13:47:38 <sipa> gavin started a bitcoin testing fund recently
 601 2012-05-20 13:48:40 <BlueMatt> sipa: link?
 602 2012-05-20 13:49:25 ThomasV has joined
 603 2012-05-20 13:51:10 <sipa> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=80019
 604 2012-05-20 13:58:42 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1364 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1364>
 605 2012-05-20 14:01:35 shadders has joined
 606 2012-05-20 14:03:05 BurtyBB has joined
 607 2012-05-20 14:04:00 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1365 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1365>
 608 2012-05-20 14:06:21 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 609 2012-05-20 14:07:41 shadders has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 610 2012-05-20 14:16:48 * luke-jr wonders why mingw says net.h is using offsetof wrong
 611 2012-05-20 14:18:19 * BlueMatt recalls seeing that compiling master on debian stable, havnt looked into it yet
 612 2012-05-20 14:19:15 <BlueMatt> (not using mingw)
 613 2012-05-20 14:20:25 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 614 2012-05-20 14:20:53 shadders has joined
 615 2012-05-20 14:21:39 <sipa> luke-jr: we have an ugly OFFSETOF macro
 616 2012-05-20 14:22:14 <luke-jr> sipa: we do? I don't see one defined
 617 2012-05-20 14:22:36 <sipa> hmmm; my memory must be failing me
 618 2012-05-20 14:25:23 Guest39551 has joined
 619 2012-05-20 14:30:23 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 620 2012-05-20 14:33:30 b4epoche has joined
 621 2012-05-20 14:47:59 one_zero has quit ()
 622 2012-05-20 14:53:56 paul0 has joined
 623 2012-05-20 15:07:13 Hasbro has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 624 2012-05-20 15:10:44 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 625 2012-05-20 15:12:40 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 626 2012-05-20 15:12:41 <Karmaon>  /join weechat
 627 2012-05-20 15:15:00 Karmaon has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8-dev)
 628 2012-05-20 15:15:29 Karmaon has joined
 629 2012-05-20 15:16:39 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
 630 2012-05-20 15:17:40 shadders has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 631 2012-05-20 15:17:42 Zarutian has joined
 632 2012-05-20 15:26:33 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-236-130.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
 633 2012-05-20 15:29:28 bcb_ has joined
 634 2012-05-20 15:29:50 Guest39551 is now known as graingert
 635 2012-05-20 15:30:20 graingert is now known as Guest1603
 636 2012-05-20 15:30:29 Guest1603 is now known as graingert_ecs
 637 2012-05-20 15:30:30 diki has joined
 638 2012-05-20 15:30:59 shadders has joined
 639 2012-05-20 15:36:34 luke-jr has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 640 2012-05-20 15:36:48 luke-jr has joined
 641 2012-05-20 15:38:03 t7 has joined
 642 2012-05-20 15:39:56 graingert_ecs has quit (Quit: graingert_ecs)
 643 2012-05-20 15:41:54 tower has joined
 644 2012-05-20 15:43:32 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 645 2012-05-20 15:49:24 ThomasV has joined
 646 2012-05-20 15:49:50 Vitas has joined
 647 2012-05-20 15:49:55 BurtyBB has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 648 2012-05-20 15:53:27 <diki> any psj gurus?
 649 2012-05-20 15:53:45 <diki> I am trying to make it merge mine, bitcoin as parent, namecoind and ixcoin as child
 650 2012-05-20 15:54:09 <diki> but I keep getting stuck at source.local.1.merged.namecoin.chainid and source.local.1.merged.ixcoin.chainid
 651 2012-05-20 15:54:19 <diki> No matter what values I put there, I get an error
 652 2012-05-20 15:54:42 <diki> it says they must be unique, I make them unique. After that I get an erro saying they must be the same...
 653 2012-05-20 15:59:52 Stellar has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 654 2012-05-20 16:11:01 minimoose has joined
 655 2012-05-20 16:12:36 rdponticelli_ has joined
 656 2012-05-20 16:13:18 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 657 2012-05-20 16:20:16 topace has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 658 2012-05-20 16:24:16 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 659 2012-05-20 16:26:18 Karmaon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 660 2012-05-20 16:28:02 tower has joined
 661 2012-05-20 16:30:01 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
 662 2012-05-20 16:33:11 rdponticelli_ is now known as rdponticelli
 663 2012-05-20 16:34:04 Bigpiggy01Mining has joined
 664 2012-05-20 16:34:36 <Bigpiggy01Mining> coderrr You around?
 665 2012-05-20 16:40:12 hazek has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 666 2012-05-20 16:42:16 Joric has quit ()
 667 2012-05-20 16:47:06 topace has joined
 668 2012-05-20 16:47:54 BurtyB has joined
 669 2012-05-20 16:48:52 Karmaon has joined
 670 2012-05-20 16:49:14 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 671 2012-05-20 16:53:08 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 672 2012-05-20 16:57:39 ThomasV has joined
 673 2012-05-20 16:57:52 <sipa> BlueMatt, jgarzik: i upgraded bitcoin.sipa.be to IPv6; address: [2a02:348:5e:5a29::1]
 674 2012-05-20 17:03:08 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 675 2012-05-20 17:06:47 DrHaribo has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 676 2012-05-20 17:10:20 DrHaribo has joined
 677 2012-05-20 17:10:32 Garr255Mobi has joined
 678 2012-05-20 17:10:47 dlb76 has quit ()
 679 2012-05-20 17:11:16 Garr255Mobi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 680 2012-05-20 17:19:02 bcb_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 681 2012-05-20 17:20:28 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 682 2012-05-20 17:24:25 Joric has joined
 683 2012-05-20 17:25:48 <jgarzik> sipa: (just to be clear) that means I can add it to bitseed.xf2 long term?
 684 2012-05-20 17:26:53 user has joined
 685 2012-05-20 17:28:11 <user> Hi I think the bitcoin gui developer should look at safebit design: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ckcmvo36bwusfe0/pg7cF3ubsR#/
 686 2012-05-20 17:28:43 <Joric> my eyes!
 687 2012-05-20 17:28:54 <user> I really liked it. It has left menu and tab
 688 2012-05-20 17:29:11 <Joric> i liked first version more
 689 2012-05-20 17:29:47 <user> the send coins, receive coins, it's not on menu. it's on window
 690 2012-05-20 17:29:50 <Joric> anyway it doesnt fit OS gui guidelines
 691 2012-05-20 17:29:56 <t7> safebit to amazon
 692 2012-05-20 17:29:57 <user> hum
 693 2012-05-20 17:30:00 <t7> thats awesome
 694 2012-05-20 17:30:19 <t7> was totally my idea but i dont mind
 695 2012-05-20 17:30:33 <user> wow
 696 2012-05-20 17:31:13 <user> hope to bitcoin gui follow safebit design
 697 2012-05-20 17:31:26 <user> just a suggestion
 698 2012-05-20 17:32:17 <user> who is responsibly for bitcoin gui?
 699 2012-05-20 17:32:35 <t7> mr bitcoin himself
 700 2012-05-20 17:33:04 <user> tcatm, wumpus?
 701 2012-05-20 17:33:54 <Joric> whoa https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77129.0 Safebit is looking for a Javascript Developer for Full Time The payment will be $1,000 every month, paid via Bitcoin or your method of choice (not including PayPal).
 702 2012-05-20 17:34:14 devrandom has joined
 703 2012-05-20 17:34:23 <Joric> and i'm working on that https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=80815.0 for 25 btc? fuck that
 704 2012-05-20 17:35:29 <Joric> btw safebit could use electrum api to get rid of bitcoind
 705 2012-05-20 17:35:48 <sipa> jgarzik: yes
 706 2012-05-20 17:39:04 <gmaxwell> user: wumpus is for the most part.
 707 2012-05-20 17:39:15 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 708 2012-05-20 17:39:53 <Joric> not sure why but latest safebit won't connect to daemon anyone confirm
 709 2012-05-20 17:39:56 andytoshi has joined
 710 2012-05-20 17:40:17 <Joric> have to look into the code
 711 2012-05-20 17:40:32 <gmaxwell> user: er, .. it has an integrated webbrowser? sounds like a great way to get robbed.
 712 2012-05-20 17:40:43 <gmaxwell> I think it looks pretty attractive though.
 713 2012-05-20 17:40:53 <gmaxwell> Tcatm's proposed gui changes would get us closer to that.
 714 2012-05-20 17:41:00 <Joric> gmaxwell, it's a google chrome app atm
 715 2012-05-20 17:41:48 <user> gmaxwell: I'm just a simple user. just liked the gui of safebit
 716 2012-05-20 17:41:49 <Joric> git clone https://github.com/elis/Safebit.git , chrome -> extensions -> developer mode -> load unpacked extension
 717 2012-05-20 17:42:17 <gmaxwell> http://188.138.99.157/stuff/qtvert17.png
 718 2012-05-20 17:42:32 <user> gmaxwell: where it is tcatm's proposal?
 719 2012-05-20 17:42:40 <user> ok
 720 2012-05-20 17:42:51 <gmaxwell> Thought personally I think I liked version 14 better, http://188.138.99.157/stuff/qtvert14.png
 721 2012-05-20 17:43:00 <Joric> heard mac users hate, even HATE anything that doesn't look like their gayos
 722 2012-05-20 17:43:44 <jgarzik> sipa gmaxwell: just updated https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1303 with a blockchain/*.dat status report.  it includes two pastebins:  (1) disk space usage comparison, and (2) debug.log output for the problems at height 173928 during block import
 723 2012-05-20 17:44:03 <jgarzik> you two had requested one or both of those pastebins
 724 2012-05-20 17:44:45 <user> gmaxwell: i didn't like it. for me the send coin, receive coin, should be button on window. not on sidebar
 725 2012-05-20 17:45:12 <user> gmaxwell: and we should have tabs on top too
 726 2012-05-20 17:45:52 <gmaxwell> user: well we do now, and the interface is a bit confusing.
 727 2012-05-20 17:46:07 <gmaxwell> (or at least I've had trouble actually directing people to the different tabs.
 728 2012-05-20 17:46:10 <gmaxwell> )
 729 2012-05-20 17:47:39 <user> each one likes different things. just want to let my opinion here. i really liked safebit interface
 730 2012-05-20 17:48:02 <jgarzik> sipa: bitseed.xf2.org updated with its first AAAA record!
 731 2012-05-20 17:48:08 * jgarzik cheers for IPv6
 732 2012-05-20 17:49:21 <Joric> user, i just used context menu for everything :) http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/8554/screenshot2012052023451.png
 733 2012-05-20 17:51:51 <user> joric: crazy thing
 734 2012-05-20 17:54:01 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 735 2012-05-20 17:54:08 <sipa> jgarzik: are you running with a modified P2SH changeover date?
 736 2012-05-20 17:56:08 MiningBuddy has joined
 737 2012-05-20 17:58:10 <sipa> jgarzik: wait... that error at 173928; does it continue normally afterwards, or does it get stuck there?
 738 2012-05-20 17:58:32 <jgarzik> sipa: it gets stuck there
 739 2012-05-20 17:58:44 <jgarzik> sipa: every block afterwards is thought invalid due to connectblock failure
 740 2012-05-20 17:58:56 <sipa> also blocks downloaded from the network?
 741 2012-05-20 17:59:33 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 ERROR: Reorganize() : ConnectBlock 00000000000008b193b9 failed
 742 2012-05-20 17:59:33 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=00000000000007ff1035  height=180916  work=329632971784247234958
 743 2012-05-20 17:59:33 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 InvalidChainFound:  current best=00000000000000668f94  height=173928  work=281572770189269801333
 744 2012-05-20 17:59:33 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 InvalidChainFound: WARNING: Displayed transactions may not be correct!  You may need to upgrade, or other nodes may need to upgrade.
 745 2012-05-20 17:59:35 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 ERROR: SetBestChain() : Reorganize failed
 746 2012-05-20 17:59:37 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 ERROR: AcceptBlock() : AddToBlockIndex failed
 747 2012-05-20 17:59:39 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED
 748 2012-05-20 17:59:41 <jgarzik> 05/20/12 16:55:03 Postponing 6988 reconnects
 749 2012-05-20 17:59:47 <sipa> outch
 750 2012-05-20 17:59:48 <jgarzik> sipa: note "6988" (the number of blocks that failed after 173928)
 751 2012-05-20 17:59:54 <jgarzik> sipa: network works!
 752 2012-05-20 17:59:56 <sipa> yes, i noticed
 753 2012-05-20 18:00:09 <jgarzik> sipa: so this is only load block import
 754 2012-05-20 18:00:14 <jgarzik> *local
 755 2012-05-20 18:00:16 <sipa> wait... it reconnects afterwards just fine?
 756 2012-05-20 18:00:26 <BlueMatt> sipa: thanks, Ill let jgarzik add it to his seed, and leave it off mine (no reason to duplicate), anyway...need to upgrade to your seed thing, Im assuming it supports ipv6?
 757 2012-05-20 18:00:40 <jgarzik> sipa: for LoadExternalBlockFile() import, the node is permanently stuck at 173928
 758 2012-05-20 18:00:40 <sipa> BlueMatt: not yet, no
 759 2012-05-20 18:01:02 <BlueMatt> ah, well it can wait until we release 0.7 anyway...
 760 2012-05-20 18:01:08 <jgarzik> sipa: for network import, the node is 100% OK, and continues to stay at correct block height, importing new blocks as they appear on the network
 761 2012-05-20 18:01:11 <Tykling> is there a fix for the 100% cpu use on freebsd issue ? running the 0.6.2 release
 762 2012-05-20 18:01:36 <sipa> Tykling: yes, use 0.6.2.2, and change the #ifdef MAC_OSX to BSD
 763 2012-05-20 18:01:49 <sipa> Tykling: in sync.h
 764 2012-05-20 18:01:54 <jgarzik> I'm about to try importing a blk0001.dat from a different source.
 765 2012-05-20 18:01:55 <sipa> near class CSemaphore
 766 2012-05-20 18:01:56 <Tykling> sipa: okay, thanks
 767 2012-05-20 18:02:03 <BlueMatt> sipa: should we apply that to master too?
 768 2012-05-20 18:02:18 <sipa> BlueMatt: master has a much better solution already
 769 2012-05-20 18:02:28 <BlueMatt> oh, I thought it was the same, nvm
 770 2012-05-20 18:02:36 <Tykling> when will the next release be made ? 0.6.3 I assume ?
 771 2012-05-20 18:02:51 <sipa> Tykling: most likely, the next will be 0.7.0, but it could still take a while
 772 2012-05-20 18:02:58 user has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 773 2012-05-20 18:03:10 <sipa> jgarzik: yes, ok, so during loadexternal, you don't make any progress; but does it get fixed if you connect to network after loadexternal?
 774 2012-05-20 18:03:14 <Tykling> okay, so waiting for the next release is not an option :>
 775 2012-05-20 18:03:27 <jgarzik> sipa: importing the same blk0001.dat on #master does not get stuck
 776 2012-05-20 18:03:29 * BlueMatt is still hoping for cblockstore/jgarzik alternative in 0.7, but....that is starting to look really, really unlikely
 777 2012-05-20 18:03:42 <jgarzik> sipa: no, not fixed following loadexternal
 778 2012-05-20 18:04:13 <jgarzik> sipa: node is permanently stuck at 173928.  restart does not cure, either.
 779 2012-05-20 18:04:30 <jgarzik> it successfully connects to the network following LoadExternalBlockFile()
 780 2012-05-20 18:04:57 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 781 2012-05-20 18:05:16 <sipa> jgarzik: what does -checkblocks -checklevel=6 reveal?
 782 2012-05-20 18:07:08 <jgarzik> sipa: will answer that question after several hours :)
 783 2012-05-20 18:07:25 <jgarzik> sipa: just blew away data, to try importing new blk0001.dat
 784 2012-05-20 18:07:36 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 785 2012-05-20 18:07:43 <jgarzik> a fresh network download of blk0001.dat
 786 2012-05-20 18:08:24 <jgarzik> I'm also uploading the blk0001.dat that causes problems
 787 2012-05-20 18:08:54 <jgarzik> eu1.bitcoincharts.com block chains are full of orphans, because it was a really old version
 788 2012-05-20 18:09:02 Lyspooner has joined
 789 2012-05-20 18:09:04 <jgarzik> good test data, as gmaxwell noted :)
 790 2012-05-20 18:09:38 <BlueMatt> Id think tcatm could save some nice bw if he fixed that, though...
 791 2012-05-20 18:09:41 <sipa> jgarzik: wait... what?
 792 2012-05-20 18:10:02 <sipa> jgarzik: loading that blk0001.dat file works fine on master, but fails on... which branch?
 793 2012-05-20 18:11:40 <jgarzik> sipa: #blockindex, the branch that splits blkindex.dat into multiple files.  The branch that I've been working on for several days, and talking about in IRC :)
 794 2012-05-20 18:11:42 <gmaxwell> sipa: jeff's crazy database structure change branch.
 795 2012-05-20 18:12:11 <sipa> jgarzik: ok, so you clearly didn't only refactor code :)
 796 2012-05-20 18:12:19 hdwow has joined
 797 2012-05-20 18:12:21 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 798 2012-05-20 18:12:21 <sipa> jgarzik: yes, i've already tested it myself too
 799 2012-05-20 18:12:34 <sipa> didn't seem faster than master, by the way
 800 2012-05-20 18:12:54 nameless has quit (!~root@mindjail.subluminal.net|Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 801 2012-05-20 18:13:13 <jgarzik> sipa: #dbenv works (encapsulate dbenv), but the #blockindex split does not.  I -thought- it was only a refactor ;-)
 802 2012-05-20 18:13:22 <jgarzik> but apparently some bugs snuck in somewhere
 803 2012-05-20 18:15:06 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
 804 2012-05-20 18:15:51 <sipa> jgarzik: your cross-db transactions, passed around in that DbTxn* variable
 805 2012-05-20 18:15:56 <sipa> do you use it anywhere?
 806 2012-05-20 18:16:52 <sipa> jgarzik: i see you creating it, and doing commit and abort on it
 807 2012-05-20 18:17:01 <sipa> but are the actual reads and writes done using it?
 808 2012-05-20 18:17:15 tower has joined
 809 2012-05-20 18:19:21 <sipa> put differently: does that created cross-db DbTxn* ever end up in any activeTxn?
 810 2012-05-20 18:20:19 <jgarzik> sipa: hmmm, a good point
 811 2012-05-20 18:21:14 <jgarzik> sipa: can't look at code this second, but that does sound like something I failed to change
 812 2012-05-20 18:21:31 <sipa> i think you're just doing every single database write as a separate transaction, instead of using the created DbTxn
 813 2012-05-20 18:21:51 <sipa> which would mean your database would get corrupted on the first reorganize
 814 2012-05-20 18:22:04 <sipa> actually, no, on the first failed block connect
 815 2012-05-20 18:23:59 Hasbro has joined
 816 2012-05-20 18:27:31 nameless has joined
 817 2012-05-20 18:28:33 <jgarzik> sipa: yeah
 818 2012-05-20 18:28:40 <jgarzik> sipa: good spotting
 819 2012-05-20 18:29:22 <jgarzik> that could also impact the fill factor and speed significantly, absent any reorg
 820 2012-05-20 18:29:33 <sipa> indeed
 821 2012-05-20 18:29:52 <sipa> already have an ipv6 connection
 822 2012-05-20 18:31:26 eian has joined
 823 2012-05-20 18:32:31 hdwow has quit (Quit: ff)
 824 2012-05-20 18:38:36 <luke-jr> sipa: https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=82610.msg910815#msg910815
 825 2012-05-20 18:39:22 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 826 2012-05-20 18:40:30 Guest1603 has joined
 827 2012-05-20 18:42:37 Guest1603 is now known as graingert
 828 2012-05-20 18:42:46 graingert has quit (Changing host)
 829 2012-05-20 18:42:46 graingert has joined
 830 2012-05-20 18:43:09 p0s has joined
 831 2012-05-20 18:43:12 graingert is now known as gavinadreson
 832 2012-05-20 18:43:20 gavinadreson is now known as graingert
 833 2012-05-20 18:43:34 t7 has joined
 834 2012-05-20 18:43:45 Xeranos has joined
 835 2012-05-20 18:43:51 graingert is now known as gavinandresen
 836 2012-05-20 18:44:13 <gavinandresen> hmm
 837 2012-05-20 18:44:26 <gavinandresen> I swore this would make nickserv complain at me
 838 2012-05-20 18:44:29 * sipa thinks gavin needs to make his nickname protected
 839 2012-05-20 18:45:05 <gavinandresen> hm
 840 2012-05-20 18:45:08 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I think NickServ tracks identities across rename
 841 2012-05-20 18:45:14 <sipa> it does
 842 2012-05-20 18:45:21 <BTC_Bear> Isn't there a 30 sec wait?
 843 2012-05-20 18:45:28 <luke-jr> [18:42:32] [Whois] gavinandresen is logged in as Graingert.
 844 2012-05-20 18:45:36 <luke-jr> BTC_Bear: only if you set enforce
 845 2012-05-20 18:45:43 <BTC_Bear> SET ENFORCE ON ah...
 846 2012-05-20 18:46:00 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 847 2012-05-20 18:46:32 <luke-jr> more annoyingly, I realize I believe he was gavin until I /whois'd
 848 2012-05-20 18:46:49 gavinandresen is now known as graingert_
 849 2012-05-20 18:47:15 * luke-jr sets his own ENFORCE flag, since he realizes the risk of such is too high
 850 2012-05-20 18:47:33 <graingert_> so I'm planing on pushing a new HEAD onto bitcoin/bitcoin
 851 2012-05-20 18:47:39 <BlueMatt> sipa: do we use (if available) windows' (very, very terrible) "private" ipv6 feature where it rotates ipv6 addresses every n hours (is it on reboot? or 24 hours?)
 852 2012-05-20 18:47:41 <BTC_Bear> Didn't we do that like a year ago? I thought everybody did.
 853 2012-05-20 18:47:54 <BlueMatt> sipa: though it shouldnt exist, its probably something we should use
 854 2012-05-20 18:47:55 gavinandresen has joined
 855 2012-05-20 18:47:57 <sipa> BlueMatt: you mean teredo?
 856 2012-05-20 18:47:57 <gavinandresen> so I'm planing on pushing a new HEAD onto bitcoin/bitcoin
 857 2012-05-20 18:48:00 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: err, what? that's standard
 858 2012-05-20 18:48:01 <BlueMatt> sipa: no
 859 2012-05-20 18:48:08 Zarutian has joined
 860 2012-05-20 18:48:12 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: no, standard is using your mac encoded in an ipv6
 861 2012-05-20 18:48:23 <BlueMatt> sipa: windows creates two ipv6 addresses for itself
 862 2012-05-20 18:48:34 <BlueMatt> sipa: one is the standard mac-encoded one, one is entirely random
 863 2012-05-20 18:48:35 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: RFC 4941
 864 2012-05-20 18:48:40 <luke-jr>    Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6
 865 2012-05-20 18:48:51 b4epoche has joined
 866 2012-05-20 18:48:53 <BlueMatt> ewwww, they made it standard...yuck
 867 2012-05-20 18:48:54 <luke-jr> Linux supports it too
 868 2012-05-20 18:49:02 <Dagger2> BlueMatt: it adds a new address every 24 hours, and keeps the last 7 addresses. I'm not sure what happens if an address gets to a week old and it's still being used for an active connection (it would be nice if it kept the address until it wasn't needed, but it might just terminate the connection)
 869 2012-05-20 18:49:07 <BlueMatt> yea, but doesnt use it by default, I hope
 870 2012-05-20 18:49:13 <Dagger2> and Linux supports privacy addresses too, but not by default
 871 2012-05-20 18:49:27 <BlueMatt> yea, thought so
 872 2012-05-20 18:49:36 <BlueMatt> I mean, ofc linux supports it, it supports everything...
 873 2012-05-20 18:49:39 <luke-jr> in any case, IMO, Bitcoin should just let the OS manage that aspect..
 874 2012-05-20 18:49:45 <Dagger2> except in recent NetworkManager versions (e.g. latest Ubuntu), which do turn it on by default
 875 2012-05-20 18:49:54 <BlueMatt> yuck
 876 2012-05-20 18:50:12 <sipa> well, whatever local address is detected, is used
 877 2012-05-20 18:50:19 <BlueMatt> hmm...Im on debian testing networkmanager, and its mac-encoded
 878 2012-05-20 18:50:32 <sipa> and it tries to listen on [::]:8333, so it would receive incoming connections
 879 2012-05-20 18:50:48 <BlueMatt> sipa: I guess my question is, does windows use its private ipv6 crap by default, and if not, we should
 880 2012-05-20 18:51:06 <sipa> i don't care, and i don't think we should try to deal with it specially
 881 2012-05-20 18:51:14 <sipa> well, i do care
 882 2012-05-20 18:51:49 <Xeranos> I'm using private testnet from http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box/, getbalance show 3650 BTC, why my balance is still 0 when I use listreceivedbyaddress ? http://pastebin.com/SB8khwQg
 883 2012-05-20 18:52:30 <BlueMatt> sipa: mmm, ok, fair enough
 884 2012-05-20 18:53:11 <sipa> i doubt autoconfigured addresses will often be routable to the internet
 885 2012-05-20 18:53:27 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: that rfc states that the design is for use when you dont have a mac address or other 64-bit interface identifier
 886 2012-05-20 18:53:35 <luke-jr> Xeranos: because mined coins use hidden addresses
 887 2012-05-20 18:53:41 <BlueMatt> sipa: huh?
 888 2012-05-20 18:53:43 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: interesting
 889 2012-05-20 18:53:54 <luke-jr> sipa: wtf?
 890 2012-05-20 18:54:55 <sipa> i must be confusing autoconfigured with private
 891 2012-05-20 18:55:10 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: well, it says it is designed to address that issue, though it indicates that it can be used with mac addresses
 892 2012-05-20 18:55:32 <sipa> windows uses that address-switching technique also in a network when a RA is present?
 893 2012-05-20 18:55:58 <BlueMatt> it can only use it in a system where ra is present
 894 2012-05-20 18:56:04 <sipa> ah
 895 2012-05-20 18:56:07 <luke-jr> sipa: so thoughts on WinXP issue?
 896 2012-05-20 18:56:08 <BlueMatt> I dont know/think it can in dhcpv6 environments
 897 2012-05-20 18:56:22 <luke-jr> isn't DHCPv6 just to delegate subnets?
 898 2012-05-20 18:56:39 <sipa> luke-jr: i think it just complains that it cannot bind to [::]:8333, but the message shouldn't be fatal
 899 2012-05-20 18:56:43 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: no that ra
 900 2012-05-20 18:57:07 gavinandresen is now known as thereal_gavinand
 901 2012-05-20 18:57:10 <BlueMatt> dhcpv6 is used because ra doesnt announce dns servers (though I think it can, but afaict its not used, by default...and....)
 902 2012-05-20 18:57:13 <luke-jr> sipa: sounds like it is?
 903 2012-05-20 18:57:18 <sipa> luke-jr: clearly, it shouldn't complain at all, unless it cannot bind anywhere
 904 2012-05-20 18:57:26 thereal_gavinand is now known as graingert
 905 2012-05-20 18:57:55 graingert is now known as nanotube_
 906 2012-05-20 18:58:11 nanotube_ is now known as graingert_ecs
 907 2012-05-20 18:58:22 graingert_ecs is now known as graingert
 908 2012-05-20 18:58:29 graingert is now known as Guest1
 909 2012-05-20 18:58:35 Guest1 is now known as graingert
 910 2012-05-20 18:58:41 <BlueMatt>  /kick graingert nick spam
 911 2012-05-20 18:58:48 <graingert_> :
 912 2012-05-20 18:58:56 <graingert_> I thought this chan had that turned off
 913 2012-05-20 18:59:07 <BlueMatt> dont think thats an option
 914 2012-05-20 18:59:13 <BlueMatt> its an option in clients to hide it, though
 915 2012-05-20 18:59:18 <sipa> ;;bc,blocka
 916 2012-05-20 18:59:19 <gribble> Error: "bc,blocka" is not a valid command.
 917 2012-05-20 18:59:19 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
 918 2012-05-20 18:59:21 <gribble> 180940
 919 2012-05-20 18:59:26 <graingert_> I believe rooms can recomend that option
 920 2012-05-20 18:59:30 <BlueMatt> ah
 921 2012-05-20 18:59:33 <graingert_> recommend
 922 2012-05-20 18:59:35 <graingert_> eg ubuntu
 923 2012-05-20 18:59:46 <luke-jr> nope
 924 2012-05-20 19:07:49 topace has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 925 2012-05-20 19:10:03 <graingert> oh really
 926 2012-05-20 19:10:05 topace has joined
 927 2012-05-20 19:10:10 <graingert> in that case I no longer believe that, luke-jr
 928 2012-05-20 19:12:54 <luke-jr> to clarify, I know it isn't part of the standard for the IRC protocol
 929 2012-05-20 19:13:41 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 930 2012-05-20 19:14:21 <Xeranos> [private testnet] hmm, why the confirmation still show as 0 ? how do I raise the number of confirmation ? http://pastebin.com/0qMJM8Pb
 931 2012-05-20 19:14:39 <BlueMatt> more blocks?
 932 2012-05-20 19:14:47 <BlueMatt> how many blocks do you have?
 933 2012-05-20 19:15:02 <graingert> I have many blocks
 934 2012-05-20 19:15:03 <luke-jr> sipa: IMO, show an error if: A) the system has at least one globally-routable address, but binding it (or [::]) fails; B) the system only has loopback addresses, or C) only loopback addresses could be bound
 935 2012-05-20 19:15:12 <BlueMatt> graingert: not you...
 936 2012-05-20 19:15:14 <luke-jr> sipa: and the error shown should be the one from the attempt to bind [::]
 937 2012-05-20 19:15:34 * luke-jr throws a block at graingert
 938 2012-05-20 19:15:44 <graingert> mgRdSJDFp7pKeQc3yPdmtVf6hL3az2PcjJ ?
 939 2012-05-20 19:15:57 <Xeranos> 193 block so far
 940 2012-05-20 19:15:59 <graingert> why is that not an address?
 941 2012-05-20 19:16:09 <graingert> !bc,blocks
 942 2012-05-20 19:16:09 <luke-jr> Xeranos: ouch, why so slow?
 943 2012-05-20 19:16:10 <gribble> 180942
 944 2012-05-20 19:16:11 <sipa> graingert: it is
 945 2012-05-20 19:16:14 <luke-jr> Xeranos: dialup?
 946 2012-05-20 19:16:15 <graingert> sipa, ?
 947 2012-05-20 19:16:16 <BlueMatt> Xeranos: odd...should have shown up with 120 blocks
 948 2012-05-20 19:16:21 <BlueMatt> hes on testnet in a box
 949 2012-05-20 19:16:21 <graingert> sipa, what type of block?
 950 2012-05-20 19:16:23 <sipa> graingert: testnet addresses don't start with 1
 951 2012-05-20 19:16:25 guruvan has quit (Quit: Later!)
 952 2012-05-20 19:16:26 <graingert> ahh
 953 2012-05-20 19:16:29 <graingert> drup
 954 2012-05-20 19:16:29 <luke-jr> oh!
 955 2012-05-20 19:16:32 <luke-jr> missed that
 956 2012-05-20 19:16:40 <graingert> yeah testnet
 957 2012-05-20 19:16:42 <BlueMatt> sipa: testnet in a box doesnt start at 1?
 958 2012-05-20 19:16:50 <sipa> BlueMatt: no
 959 2012-05-20 19:16:57 <sipa> BlueMatt: it has some premined blocks
 960 2012-05-20 19:17:06 <BlueMatt> how many?
 961 2012-05-20 19:17:07 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
 962 2012-05-20 19:17:15 <graingert> #testnet is probably where you want to go for that
 963 2012-05-20 19:17:17 <graingert> ;)
 964 2012-05-20 19:17:29 * luke-jr smacks graingert
 965 2012-05-20 19:17:34 <BlueMatt> we have a #testnet?????wtf?
 966 2012-05-20 19:17:39 guruvan has joined
 967 2012-05-20 19:17:47 <sipa> luke-jr: i think i'll do this: show an error if both of the default binds ([::]:8333 and 0.0.0.0:8333), or if any explicit -bind= fails
 968 2012-05-20 19:17:58 <sipa> +fail
 969 2012-05-20 19:18:04 <graingert> BlueMatt, no someone else has regsistered
 970 2012-05-20 19:18:05 <graingert> it
 971 2012-05-20 19:18:09 <luke-jr> sipa: sounds good
 972 2012-05-20 19:19:15 <graingert> sipa, can bitcoin use other ports?
 973 2012-05-20 19:19:32 <graingert> UPNP
 974 2012-05-20 19:19:38 <graingert> ie if it can't UPNP *
 975 2012-05-20 19:19:47 <Xeranos> I'm using the data from http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box/, in the wallet it has 3650 btc and start at 195 blocks.
 976 2012-05-20 19:19:59 <luke-jr> sipa: actually, maybe it shouldn't warn even if it fails to listen…
 977 2012-05-20 19:20:06 <luke-jr> sipa: since there could always be a firewall interfering
 978 2012-05-20 19:20:19 <sipa> luke-jr: firewalls won't prevent you from listening
 979 2012-05-20 19:20:21 <luke-jr> (or maybe just for -bind
 980 2012-05-20 19:20:23 <graingert> luke-jr, should read some of the torrent client code as they do a bunch of changes
 981 2012-05-20 19:20:24 <sipa> just from receiving anything
 982 2012-05-20 19:20:28 <luke-jr> sipa: right, but it has the same effect
 983 2012-05-20 19:20:31 <graingert> checks*
 984 2012-05-20 19:20:55 <sipa> luke-jr: failing to bind either means something else is already listening on that port, or the network layer doesn't exist
 985 2012-05-20 19:20:57 <luke-jr> sipa: with that in mind, I suspect it makes more sense to just amend the Connections tooltip thing
 986 2012-05-20 19:21:06 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 987 2012-05-20 19:21:13 <luke-jr> sipa: or the user doesn't have permission to listen on the port?
 988 2012-05-20 19:21:20 <graingert> sipa, what happens if another user is using bitcoin on the box?
 989 2012-05-20 19:21:28 <graingert> can bitcoin shift to another port
 990 2012-05-20 19:21:33 <sipa> sure, -port=
 991 2012-05-20 19:21:47 <luke-jr> I think he meant automatically ;P
 992 2012-05-20 19:21:49 <graingert> sipa, no dynamically
 993 2012-05-20 19:21:51 <graingert> ^
 994 2012-05-20 19:21:58 <sipa> maybe later
 995 2012-05-20 19:22:34 <sipa> but failing to bind (on 0.0.0.0:8333) has always caused a fatal error; i wouldn't change that right now
 996 2012-05-20 19:23:50 <graingert> :(
 997 2012-05-20 19:24:08 <luke-jr> sipa: if [::] succeeds, 0.0.0.0 fails sometimes
 998 2012-05-20 19:24:18 <graingert> you should probably try dual stack
 999 2012-05-20 19:24:28 <graingert> with happy eyeballs
1000 2012-05-20 19:24:41 <sipa> luke-jr: yes, therefore it should only complain if both fail
1001 2012-05-20 19:24:50 <graingert> sipa, and it should try both
1002 2012-05-20 19:24:55 <sipa> graingert: it does
1003 2012-05-20 19:25:01 <graingert> and it should maintain both
1004 2012-05-20 19:25:24 <sipa> luke-jr: but we use IPV6_V6ONLY on supported systems, and others typically have it as non-configurable property anyway
1005 2012-05-20 19:26:59 Raziel_ has joined
1006 2012-05-20 19:31:06 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: I'm trying to convince Nathan Burney (the lawyer who writes that comic you linked to) to accept bitcoin donations. He says he's considered it and just wants conversion to be a little easier
1007 2012-05-20 19:32:13 <nathan7> hrmpf
1008 2012-05-20 19:32:22 <nathan7> There are too many nathans on this planet
1009 2012-05-20 19:32:53 <sipa> nah, just one too many
1010 2012-05-20 19:32:54 <sipa> ;)
1011 2012-05-20 19:34:06 * luke-jr pokes sipa to #936 <.<
1012 2012-05-20 19:34:11 Diapolo has joined
1013 2012-05-20 19:36:18 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
1014 2012-05-20 19:36:20 <sipa> luke-jr: i don't think i know enough about it to judge
1015 2012-05-20 19:37:04 <luke-jr> sipa: eh, it's already ACK'd by jgarzik, you, forrestv, etc <.<
1016 2012-05-20 19:43:28 eian has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1017 2012-05-20 19:44:35 philip_ has joined
1018 2012-05-20 19:45:09 philip_ has left ()
1019 2012-05-20 19:45:49 eian has joined
1020 2012-05-20 19:46:18 <luke-jr> sipa: 660ff17 Use boost::thread locking instead of interprocess <-- did this fix something?
1021 2012-05-20 19:46:34 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: why did the decomposition stuff end up in BIP22?
1022 2012-05-20 19:46:50 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
1023 2012-05-20 19:47:09 <luke-jr> it's not really decomposition in BIP22 context, but code reuse was handy
1024 2012-05-20 19:47:52 <sipa> luke-jr: it's an alternative solution to the 100% issue on OSX and BSD, without workaround code for those
1025 2012-05-20 19:48:37 <Diapolo> What are you guys discussing?
1026 2012-05-20 19:48:40 graingert is now known as phantomcircuit_
1027 2012-05-20 19:48:47 phantomcircuit_ is now known as graingert
1028 2012-05-20 19:48:50 graingert is now known as phantomcircuit__
1029 2012-05-20 19:48:58 <sipa> Diapolo: #936
1030 2012-05-20 19:49:01 phantomcircuit__ is now known as graingert
1031 2012-05-20 19:51:45 sgornick has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
1032 2012-05-20 19:52:47 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I mean that you can change the format of the responses, seems a bit needlessly complicated to me— I don't mind but it might make life harder on other server implementors.
1033 2012-05-20 19:53:15 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: see PM
1034 2012-05-20 19:55:15 <Diapolo> too much magic for me ;)
1035 2012-05-20 19:55:52 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1036 2012-05-20 20:00:11 * jgarzik tests cross-db txn fix
1037 2012-05-20 20:00:13 <jgarzik> 171,300
1038 2012-05-20 20:01:42 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-236-130.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
1039 2012-05-20 20:02:59 <jgarzik> 172,400
1040 2012-05-20 20:08:08 dvide has joined
1041 2012-05-20 20:12:13 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: it's a legit concern— but if it brings him funds he wouldn't otherwise get, why would it matter if he takes N months to get around to cashing them out?
1042 2012-05-20 20:12:28 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: if it's free money might as well save to use for alpaca socks.
1043 2012-05-20 20:16:19 <copumpkin> yup :)
1044 2012-05-20 20:20:45 <jgarzik> fixed!
1045 2012-05-20 20:20:54 <jgarzik> boy, that was a dumb bug
1046 2012-05-20 20:22:34 <gmaxwell> oh?
1047 2012-05-20 20:23:03 <Diapolo> nice I'm connected to 6 nodes via IPv6
1048 2012-05-20 20:23:36 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't get why Trog is guilty tho - assuming he didn't know when he signed on that they were criminals
1049 2012-05-20 20:25:41 <Joric> who's Trog damnit
1050 2012-05-20 20:25:53 <luke-jr> http://thecriminallawyer.tumblr.com/post/21826668142/14-duress
1051 2012-05-20 20:26:12 <luke-jr> also, I suspect some of these are wrong for Florida
1052 2012-05-20 20:28:23 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I suspect that the assumption there was that he knew or should have known that they were a gang of thugs.
1053 2012-05-20 20:28:52 <t7> wall of comic
1054 2012-05-20 20:28:54 <t7> tldr
1055 2012-05-20 20:29:09 <sipa> jgarzik: looks good; i'll benchmark it again soon
1056 2012-05-20 20:29:23 <gmaxwell> e.g. if it was the young ladies sewing club it would be another matter— and yes, somethings differ from state to state (though the consistency is pretty good)
1057 2012-05-20 20:30:29 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: pretty sure I can kill to protect random strangers here
1058 2012-05-20 20:34:12 graingert has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1059 2012-05-20 20:34:49 <andytoshi> does anyone here have experience doing OSS on windows?
1060 2012-05-20 20:34:56 <andytoshi> or does everything just use mingw?
1061 2012-05-20 20:35:08 graingert_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1062 2012-05-20 20:35:53 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: there are things that target MSVC too..
1063 2012-05-20 20:36:03 <gmaxwell> it's certantly easier to use mingw, esp as you can then crosscompile.
1064 2012-05-20 20:36:29 eoss has joined
1065 2012-05-20 20:36:30 erle- has joined
1066 2012-05-20 20:36:50 Guest1603 has joined
1067 2012-05-20 20:39:10 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1068 2012-05-20 20:39:48 <luke-jr> andytoshi: MingW *is* OSS on Windows
1069 2012-05-20 20:41:12 PK has quit ()
1070 2012-05-20 20:43:11 <Diapolo> sipa: Can you point me to the file, where the block-chain rescan function is?
1071 2012-05-20 20:47:18 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1072 2012-05-20 20:47:22 tyn has joined
1073 2012-05-20 20:49:01 Diapolo has left ()
1074 2012-05-20 20:49:26 <jgarzik> sipa: hash still need tuning, most likely
1075 2012-05-20 20:49:30 torsthaldo has joined
1076 2012-05-20 20:50:54 tyn has quit (Client Quit)
1077 2012-05-20 20:53:25 <jgarzik> sipa gmaxwell: db_stat output for the New Way: http://pastebin.com/LEw3PQbL
1078 2012-05-20 20:56:33 eoss has joined
1079 2012-05-20 20:56:33 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1080 2012-05-20 20:56:33 eoss has joined
1081 2012-05-20 21:04:23 Lyspooner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.12/20101026200743])
1082 2012-05-20 21:04:42 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1083 2012-05-20 21:15:33 <sipa> we should put this on bitcoin.org: http://www.worldipv6launch.org/wp-content/themes/ipv6/downloads/World_IPv6_launch_banner_512.png
1084 2012-05-20 21:15:38 tosku has joined
1085 2012-05-20 21:15:52 tosku has left ()
1086 2012-05-20 21:21:49 <DBordello> Does the latest git tree include https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/841?
1087 2012-05-20 21:22:06 <sipa> yes
1088 2012-05-20 21:22:17 <DBordello> fantastic
1089 2012-05-20 21:22:27 Snapman is now known as Snapman[afkers]
1090 2012-05-20 21:23:34 <DBordello> I am trying to compile it, however, I am getting the following error: http://pastebin.com/52AmaNQ2
1091 2012-05-20 21:23:35 <DBordello> any ideas?
1092 2012-05-20 21:23:51 <DBordello> (i realize that is poorly formatted)
1093 2012-05-20 21:24:53 TD has joined
1094 2012-05-20 21:25:01 ThomasV has joined
1095 2012-05-20 21:25:10 <gmaxwell> DBordello: how are you tryint to compile what? (master? via make -f Makefile.unix bitcoind USE_UPNP= ?)  on what OS?
1096 2012-05-20 21:25:37 <sipa> DBordello: looks like you're not compiling addrman.cpp and walletdb.cpp
1097 2012-05-20 21:25:42 <sipa> old makefile?
1098 2012-05-20 21:25:47 <DBordello> sipa, very likely.
1099 2012-05-20 21:25:48 <gmaxwell> My guess is you're using some broken makefile.
1100 2012-05-20 21:25:59 <DBordello> let me diff that with Makefile.unix
1101 2012-05-20 21:26:01 <gmaxwell> DBordello: Bitcoin includes a makefile. It should work for you. Use it.
1102 2012-05-20 21:26:11 <DBordello> gmaxwell, okay, I'll take a look at that
1103 2012-05-20 21:27:44 <DBordello> Thanks for the heads up
1104 2012-05-20 21:28:48 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1105 2012-05-20 21:30:16 wahjava has joined
1106 2012-05-20 21:30:17 wahjava has quit (Client Quit)
1107 2012-05-20 21:30:18 Zarutian has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1108 2012-05-20 21:31:23 Joric_ has joined
1109 2012-05-20 21:31:23 Joric_ has quit (Changing host)
1110 2012-05-20 21:31:23 Joric_ has joined
1111 2012-05-20 21:31:48 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1112 2012-05-20 21:33:20 <DBordello> It is a slow process to debug on a VPS
1113 2012-05-20 21:35:02 Snapman[afkers] is now known as Snapman
1114 2012-05-20 21:37:07 theymos has joined
1115 2012-05-20 21:44:37 <theymos> What do you guys think about increasing the rate at which the minimum fee is increased when the blocksize is >250kB? Currently at blocksize=475kB the minimum fee is ~0.01 BTC, which is nothing.
1116 2012-05-20 21:46:01 <gmaxwell> I endorse the thought— but I don't know if that will be useful.
1117 2012-05-20 21:46:14 <theymos> Why?
1118 2012-05-20 21:46:56 <BlueMatt> how far did sipa  get on his whole completely redo fee structure stuff?
1119 2012-05-20 21:47:09 <sipa> BlueMatt: nowhere
1120 2012-05-20 21:47:19 <gmaxwell> ~No one will actually send that larger fee— there isn't automation to increase further (and if there was it would make people more nervous about fees).  ... and that just means we'll spread the same load out over more time and further delay non-spammy innocent free txns.
1121 2012-05-20 21:47:50 <BlueMatt> sipa: well thats a shame...
1122 2012-05-20 21:47:50 <gmaxwell> theymos: the recent increased load is from a gambling site that works pretty much entirely on unconfirmed transactions. It doesn't bother them it it's taking weeks to get a low fee transaction in.
1123 2012-05-20 21:48:53 sirk390 has joined
1124 2012-05-20 21:49:02 <gmaxwell> I'd think we'd do more to help users to detected repeated address use and put them at the back of the line— so at least they don't get in front of as many normal users.
1125 2012-05-20 21:49:19 <theymos> gmaxwell: If blocks usually end up in the 250kB+ more-expensive state, people can manually add more fees to their transactions to speed up confirmation.
1126 2012-05-20 21:49:48 * BlueMatt goes digging for the brief discussions with sipa on the progress he did make...
1127 2012-05-20 21:50:00 <gmaxwell> theymos: we could also prioritize on highest fees and let people do the same. But fair point.
1128 2012-05-20 21:51:02 <gmaxwell> Also the current fee model in the client makes it hard to do that— depending on the composition of your wallet you can easly end up with a 40k transaction... 0.1 BTC/K doesn't sound bad when a normal txn is well under 1k .. but at 40k thats a fair bit of coin.
1129 2012-05-20 21:51:22 Snapman is now known as Snapman[afkers]
1130 2012-05-20 21:54:26 <theymos> What do you think about discounting fees when many inputs are being sent to only a few outputs? (Since this theoretically decreases the total block size that people need to remember.)
1131 2012-05-20 21:54:56 tucenaber has joined
1132 2012-05-20 21:56:39 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1133 2012-05-20 21:57:28 <sipa> jgarzik: still a slight slowdown compared to master
1134 2012-05-20 22:00:47 MiningBuddy has joined
1135 2012-05-20 22:04:44 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1136 2012-05-20 22:04:49 <gmaxwell> sipa: would be interesting to switch them all back to btree and see what it does.
1137 2012-05-20 22:05:23 darkee has joined
1138 2012-05-20 22:07:56 <jgarzik> sipa: looking at db_stat, one sees a ton of wasted space in overflow pages, in txhash.dat
1139 2012-05-20 22:08:06 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: I was thinking about running at comparison, indeed
1140 2012-05-20 22:13:27 cdecker has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1141 2012-05-20 22:16:12 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1142 2012-05-20 22:18:53 <sipa> if only ecdsa signatures were deterministic
1143 2012-05-20 22:19:29 <sipa> gavin's signature cache would speed up block verification, because transactions often use several outputs from the same address
1144 2012-05-20 22:24:46 Guest1603 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1145 2012-05-20 22:24:56 sirk390 has left ()
1146 2012-05-20 22:25:45 LightRider has joined
1147 2012-05-20 22:26:46 hahuang65 has joined
1148 2012-05-20 22:27:26 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
1149 2012-05-20 22:28:52 <gmaxwell> sipa: well they sign different data in any case.
1150 2012-05-20 22:29:05 <sipa> do they?
1151 2012-05-20 22:29:11 <gmaxwell> they include the input no?
1152 2012-05-20 22:29:29 <gmaxwell> (otherwise you could input rebinding attacks)
1153 2012-05-20 22:29:53 <sipa> right, so it would only work if they spent from the exact same tx
1154 2012-05-20 22:30:08 <sipa> which is far less common, i suppose
1155 2012-05-20 22:30:19 <BlueMatt> same input, not just same tx, right?
1156 2012-05-20 22:30:33 <BlueMatt> s/same input/from same output/
1157 2012-05-20 22:30:37 <gmaxwell> it would be better if we could multi-satisify identical input scriptpubkeys, but oh well.
1158 2012-05-20 22:30:44 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-236-130.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
1159 2012-05-20 22:31:10 <sipa> BlueMatt: hmm, right
1160 2012-05-20 22:31:15 <sipa> never mind my remark :)
1161 2012-05-20 22:32:10 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1162 2012-05-20 22:32:41 Raziel_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1163 2012-05-20 22:34:14 retro123 has joined
1164 2012-05-20 22:36:24 <diki> what is the most basic way to generate a random bitcoin address?
1165 2012-05-20 22:36:36 <BlueMatt> use the new address button in bitcoin-qt?
1166 2012-05-20 22:36:43 <diki> I am looking at vanitygen, but it looks too complex
1167 2012-05-20 22:38:35 sirk390 has joined
1168 2012-05-20 22:40:52 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1169 2012-05-20 22:41:24 copumpkin has joined
1170 2012-05-20 22:43:27 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
1171 2012-05-20 22:44:44 retro123 has left ()
1172 2012-05-20 22:47:06 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1173 2012-05-20 22:47:30 rdponticelli has joined
1174 2012-05-20 22:51:24 tower has joined
1175 2012-05-20 22:55:02 Joric_ is now known as Joric
1176 2012-05-20 23:00:35 skeledrew has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1177 2012-05-20 23:01:05 skeledrew has joined
1178 2012-05-20 23:01:53 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1179 2012-05-20 23:03:46 b4epoche has joined
1180 2012-05-20 23:08:13 * Eliel wonders why bitcoin-qt would take 5 minutes to start up.
1181 2012-05-20 23:08:48 <Eliel> it's possible it crashed the last time it was running. Could that be it?
1182 2012-05-20 23:08:58 <sipa> what's in debug.log?
1183 2012-05-20 23:09:13 <sipa> it can be very slow, if blkindex.dat is not cached by the OS
1184 2012-05-20 23:09:39 EPiSKiNG- has quit ()
1185 2012-05-20 23:09:40 <gmaxwell> 5 _minutes_ ? that sounds odd.
1186 2012-05-20 23:09:54 <sipa> on my vps it's even slower i think
1187 2012-05-20 23:10:00 <Eliel> debug.log is 5.7 megabytes ... I wonder how to best find the session start for just now
1188 2012-05-20 23:10:14 <gmaxwell> Eliel: search backwards for the first line.
1189 2012-05-20 23:10:29 <gmaxwell> or just go to the end and scroll up,,, won't be far.
1190 2012-05-20 23:10:30 <gribble> Error: "," is not a valid command.
1191 2012-05-20 23:10:38 <Eliel> the first line is 7ce8f9c4095f   0
1192 2012-05-20 23:11:16 <sipa> Eliel: grep for the last occurrance of 'bitcoin' in the file
1193 2012-05-20 23:11:34 <gmaxwell> Eliel: I mean the first line bitcoin puts out, like Bitcoin version v0.6.1-247-g531fb03-beta (2012-05-18 20:56:31 -0400)
1194 2012-05-20 23:13:06 <Eliel> interesting version :D Bitcoin version vCLIENT_VERSION_MAJOR.CLIENT_VERSION_MINOR.CLIENT_VERSION_REVISION.CLIENT_VERSION_BUILD-g8ff1873-beta ()
1195 2012-05-20 23:13:55 <Eliel> ok, maybe 5 minutes was overestimation :)
1196 2012-05-20 23:14:00 <Eliel> but still, half of that
1197 2012-05-20 23:14:01 <sipa> Eliel: we've already learnt to recognize that as non-gt build of 0.6.2
1198 2012-05-20 23:14:07 <sipa> *non-git
1199 2012-05-20 23:14:13 <Eliel>  block index          157940ms
1200 2012-05-20 23:14:36 <gmaxwell> 15 seconds is a bit more plausable.
1201 2012-05-20 23:15:04 <Eliel> that's 158 seconds unless I'm too sleepy to count :)
1202 2012-05-20 23:15:14 <sipa>  block index          328556ms
1203 2012-05-20 23:15:32 <gmaxwell> oh .. I'm too sleepy to count.
1204 2012-05-20 23:15:34 <gmaxwell> indeed.
1205 2012-05-20 23:15:37 <gmaxwell> thats nuts!
1206 2012-05-20 23:15:40 <gmaxwell> :(
1207 2012-05-20 23:15:52 <sipa> glad i don't often restart bitcoind on my vps :)
1208 2012-05-20 23:16:20 <Eliel> is that due to slow hard drive?
1209 2012-05-20 23:16:35 <Eliel> this is a laptop afterall
1210 2012-05-20 23:16:48 <sipa> Eliel: how much RAM do you have?
1211 2012-05-20 23:16:54 <Eliel> 3GB
1212 2012-05-20 23:17:12 <sipa> try cat ~/.bitcoin/blkindex.dat >/dev/null
1213 2012-05-20 23:17:17 <sipa> before you start
1214 2012-05-20 23:17:22 <Eliel> around 50% of RAM in use
1215 2012-05-20 23:17:28 <sipa> it should make startup very fast
1216 2012-05-20 23:17:45 <Eliel> if that helps, maybe bitcoin should do it itself :P
1217 2012-05-20 23:17:45 <sipa> (of course, that cat command may be slow...)
1218 2012-05-20 23:18:47 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1219 2012-05-20 23:19:12 <Eliel> oh and, the blockchain is on an encrypted partition.
1220 2012-05-20 23:19:15 darkee has joined
1221 2012-05-20 23:19:19 Turingi has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1222 2012-05-20 23:19:20 <Eliel> so that probably explains some of the slowness
1223 2012-05-20 23:19:33 <sipa> yup
1224 2012-05-20 23:21:53 <Eliel> well, I usually keep bitcoin-qt running all the time so this isn't a problem too often.
1225 2012-05-20 23:21:59 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1226 2012-05-20 23:22:08 <Eliel> ... ah, I think I forgot to start it up again after upgrading it.
1227 2012-05-20 23:22:35 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
1228 2012-05-20 23:22:36 <gribble> 180968
1229 2012-05-20 23:23:17 <Eliel> but it was nice looking at the transactions per day graphs with the ouliers removed :)
1230 2012-05-20 23:24:01 <Eliel> looks like it's following exponential growth curve :)
1231 2012-05-20 23:24:50 <Eliel> the spike in transactions from a year ago looks like an anomaly though :D
1232 2012-05-20 23:24:56 rdponticelli_ has joined
1233 2012-05-20 23:25:32 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1234 2012-05-20 23:33:00 retro123 has joined
1235 2012-05-20 23:35:31 mmoya_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1236 2012-05-20 23:38:01 RainbowDashh has joined
1237 2012-05-20 23:38:26 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: roques opened pull request 1366 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1366>
1238 2012-05-20 23:41:01 Snapman[afkers] is now known as Snapman
1239 2012-05-20 23:41:24 retro123 has left ()
1240 2012-05-20 23:42:59 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
1241 2012-05-20 23:52:15 <gmaxwell> PROCESSMESSAGE SKIPPED 20 BYTES
1242 2012-05-20 23:52:36 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1243 2012-05-20 23:52:50 <sipa> gmaxwell: same saw too, a short while ago
1244 2012-05-20 23:53:17 <gmaxwell> I wish it were a little easier to grep out the normal stuff from our logs.
1245 2012-05-20 23:54:13 <luke-jr> I saw that a lot when I was trying to make Eloipool work with the stupid pre-Feb20 crap
1246 2012-05-20 23:56:20 tower has quit (Quit: | ReactOS - The FOSS alternative to MS Windows! | http://www.reactos.org/ | join #ReactOS |)
1247 2012-05-20 23:56:34 bonks has quit (Excess Flood)
1248 2012-05-20 23:57:36 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, 20 bytes is weird 4 bytes is bad system time
1249 2012-05-20 23:58:52 <gmaxwell> I actually have 4 of them on my public node log today.
1250 2012-05-20 23:59:10 LightRider has quit ()
1251 2012-05-20 23:59:20 bonks has joined
1252 2012-05-20 23:59:44 <gmaxwell> and they don't appear to be right after a new connection started.