1 2012-07-21 00:00:01 danbri has joined
2 2012-07-21 00:02:16 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3 2012-07-21 00:04:09 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4 2012-07-21 00:15:12 one_zero has joined
5 2012-07-21 00:33:30 dvide has joined
6 2012-07-21 00:39:43 [\\\] has joined
7 2012-07-21 00:41:45 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
8 2012-07-21 00:42:50 <[Tycho]> Is someone here ?
9 2012-07-21 00:43:12 rdponticelli has joined
10 2012-07-21 00:54:46 danbri has joined
11 2012-07-21 00:56:42 B0g4r7_ has joined
12 2012-07-21 00:59:01 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
13 2012-07-21 00:59:01 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
14 2012-07-21 01:00:09 Diablo-D3 has joined
15 2012-07-21 01:00:27 Transisto has joined
16 2012-07-21 01:03:36 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
17 2012-07-21 01:04:59 unred2 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
18 2012-07-21 01:06:14 torsthaldo has joined
19 2012-07-21 01:11:56 gasteve has joined
20 2012-07-21 01:11:56 gasteve has quit (Changing host)
21 2012-07-21 01:11:56 gasteve has joined
22 2012-07-21 01:25:50 sytse has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
23 2012-07-21 01:40:29 sytse has joined
24 2012-07-21 01:40:37 unred2 has joined
25 2012-07-21 01:48:03 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: yes
26 2012-07-21 01:48:05 <gmaxwell> I am so tired of the block height not being obviously displayed in the client.
27 2012-07-21 01:48:37 <[Tycho]> jgarzik: are you expert in bitcoind building ? :)
28 2012-07-21 01:48:55 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: sometimes :) what's going on?
29 2012-07-21 01:49:02 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
30 2012-07-21 01:49:51 <[Tycho]> Surprisingly bitcoind fails to build on ONE of my PCs,
31 2012-07-21 01:49:55 <[Tycho]> main.cpp: In member function 'bool CBlock::ReadFromDisk(const CBlockIndex*, bool)':
32 2012-07-21 01:49:55 <[Tycho]> main.cpp:1204: error: no match for 'operator=' in '*(CBlock*)this = CBlockIndex::GetBlockHeader() const()'
33 2012-07-21 01:49:55 <[Tycho]> main.h:1120: note: candidates are: CBlock& CBlock::operator=(CBlock&)
34 2012-07-21 01:49:56 <[Tycho]> gmake: *** [obj/nogui/main.o] Error 1
35 2012-07-21 01:50:05 <[Tycho]> But works fine on others
36 2012-07-21 01:50:34 <[Tycho]> Also, when this couple of strings is removed from main.cpp it builds and works just fine
37 2012-07-21 01:50:47 <[Tycho]> Makefiles and source 100% identical on all machines.
38 2012-07-21 01:51:01 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
39 2012-07-21 01:54:47 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: can you paste the actual source code line?
40 2012-07-21 01:55:01 <[Tycho]> if (!fReadTransactions)
41 2012-07-21 01:55:01 <[Tycho]> {
42 2012-07-21 01:55:01 <[Tycho]> *this = pindex->GetBlockHeader();
43 2012-07-21 01:55:02 <[Tycho]> return true;
44 2012-07-21 01:55:04 <[Tycho]> }
45 2012-07-21 01:55:25 <jgarzik> one sec, looking at headers
46 2012-07-21 01:56:50 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: OS version? compiler version?
47 2012-07-21 01:57:19 <[Tycho]> FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE-p3 amd64
48 2012-07-21 01:57:41 <[Tycho]> g++ (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD]
49 2012-07-21 01:57:57 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: I'm curious if this will work around: CBlock blktmp = pindex->GetBlockHeader(); *this = blktmp; return true;
50 2012-07-21 01:57:58 <[Tycho]> Same error with g++42 (GCC) 4.2.5 20090325 (prerelease) [FreeBSD Ports Collection]
51 2012-07-21 01:58:26 <gmaxwell> man, pre 4.3 gcc for C++. good lord, I'm surprised it works at all. :)
52 2012-07-21 01:58:40 <jgarzik> I'm thinking it might be const-related
53 2012-07-21 01:59:16 <[Tycho]> Other machine is FreeBSD 8.2
54 2012-07-21 01:59:28 <[Tycho]> Works there, but don't know why.
55 2012-07-21 01:59:52 agath has joined
56 2012-07-21 01:59:56 <jgarzik> {
57 2012-07-21 01:59:56 <jgarzik> CBlock blktmp = pindex->GetBlockHeader();
58 2012-07-21 01:59:56 <jgarzik> *this = blktmp;
59 2012-07-21 01:59:56 <jgarzik> return true;
60 2012-07-21 01:59:56 <jgarzik> }
61 2012-07-21 02:00:02 <[Tycho]> Trying
62 2012-07-21 02:03:27 <[Tycho]> Wow, it worked.
63 2012-07-21 02:03:29 <[Tycho]> Thanks.
64 2012-07-21 02:03:31 <[Tycho]> But why ?
65 2012-07-21 02:04:14 maaku has joined
66 2012-07-21 02:05:19 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
67 2012-07-21 02:05:51 guruvan has joined
68 2012-07-21 02:06:08 <[Tycho]> gmaxwell: building gcc48 to try it just out of curiosity :)
69 2012-07-21 02:06:46 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
70 2012-07-21 02:07:16 guruvan_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
71 2012-07-21 02:08:35 guruvan_ has joined
72 2012-07-21 02:09:55 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: gets around lack of 'const' in GetBlockHeader(), I suspect
73 2012-07-21 02:10:07 <jgarzik> er, the other way around
74 2012-07-21 02:10:45 <[Tycho]> Mostly I'm curious why it works on another machine with almost the same g++ 4.2
75 2012-07-21 02:11:08 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: is 'another machine' 32bit rather than amd64?
76 2012-07-21 02:11:28 <[Tycho]> No.
77 2012-07-21 02:11:44 <[Tycho]> Same amd64, just a bit older version of OS
78 2012-07-21 02:12:11 <[Tycho]> Also I see "patched" remark in the g++ version of the "new" machine.
79 2012-07-21 02:12:25 <[Tycho]> (may be it was added when I installed gnat there...)
80 2012-07-21 02:12:47 hnz has joined
81 2012-07-21 02:13:56 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
82 2012-07-21 02:16:11 minimoose has joined
83 2012-07-21 02:16:24 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
84 2012-07-21 02:16:33 [7] has joined
85 2012-07-21 02:19:58 Bwild has joined
86 2012-07-21 02:21:25 xork has joined
87 2012-07-21 02:21:49 <xork> Dev regarding the client or can we discuss services too?
88 2012-07-21 02:24:03 galambo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
89 2012-07-21 02:28:00 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
90 2012-07-21 02:28:02 xork has left ("Leaving")
91 2012-07-21 02:30:41 bennysx has joined
92 2012-07-21 02:32:06 supnigga has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
93 2012-07-21 02:36:43 <Diablo-D3> hey gmaxwell
94 2012-07-21 02:36:50 <Diablo-D3> I have found my new favorite word
95 2012-07-21 02:36:53 <Diablo-D3> refuctoring
96 2012-07-21 02:36:57 <Diablo-D3> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/07/new-programming-jargon.html
97 2012-07-21 02:37:42 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
98 2012-07-21 02:37:49 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
99 2012-07-21 02:39:30 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
100 2012-07-21 02:40:51 ahbritto_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
101 2012-07-21 02:41:12 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
102 2012-07-21 02:44:53 toffoo has joined
103 2012-07-21 02:53:54 ahbritto_ has joined
104 2012-07-21 02:55:22 ahbritto has joined
105 2012-07-21 03:03:36 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
106 2012-07-21 03:12:04 BitcoinBaltar has quit ()
107 2012-07-21 03:23:39 galambo has joined
108 2012-07-21 03:24:14 galambo is now known as galambo_
109 2012-07-21 03:26:37 word has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
110 2012-07-21 03:27:02 elkingrey has joined
111 2012-07-21 04:09:11 ivan\ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
112 2012-07-21 04:16:02 ivan\ has joined
113 2012-07-21 04:19:35 maaku has joined
114 2012-07-21 04:21:57 TimothyA has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
115 2012-07-21 04:24:45 <gmaxwell> hm. Person I was helping earlier in #bitcoin has a stuck node on macos...
116 2012-07-21 04:25:02 <gmaxwell> debug.log shows:
117 2012-07-21 04:25:03 <gmaxwell> received block 00000000000004f77730
118 2012-07-21 04:25:03 <gmaxwell> Postponing 30 reconnects
119 2012-07-21 04:25:03 <gmaxwell> REORGANIZE
120 2012-07-21 04:25:03 <gmaxwell> REORGANIZE: Disconnect 0 blocks; 00000000000003f38b33..00000000000003f38b33
121 2012-07-21 04:25:05 <gmaxwell> REORGANIZE: Connect 1 blocks; 00000000000003f38b33..0000000000000025bc30
122 2012-07-21 04:25:24 <gmaxwell> and then no more activity (just lots of connect noise)
123 2012-07-21 04:26:03 <gmaxwell> so it looks like yet another way for nodes to get stuck. :-/
124 2012-07-21 04:27:46 <leotreasure> hello
125 2012-07-21 04:28:09 <leotreasure> i'm trying to run bitcoind on a vps but getting error: couldn't connect to server
126 2012-07-21 04:31:57 <D34TH> is it completly started?
127 2012-07-21 04:32:07 <D34TH> or is it still downloading the chain?
128 2012-07-21 04:32:25 <leotreasure> i think it should be finished downloading by now
129 2012-07-21 04:32:39 <leotreasure> i started it about 12 hours ago
130 2012-07-21 04:33:12 <leotreasure> although i got an anti abuse email from the vps provider saying i had a lot of disk io operations
131 2012-07-21 04:33:26 <leotreasure> so i'm not sure if they have stopped it or not
132 2012-07-21 04:33:48 <leotreasure> i tried ps aux and can't seem to see the bitcoind running
133 2012-07-21 04:34:00 <luke-jr> leotreasure: tell the VPS provider to stfu? :p
134 2012-07-21 04:34:01 <gmaxwell> leotreasure: look in the debug.log
135 2012-07-21 04:34:09 <luke-jr> it's not abuse to use the service you're paying for <.<
136 2012-07-21 04:34:34 <leotreasure> thanks luke-jr that's what i figured
137 2012-07-21 04:34:46 <leotreasure> thanks gmaxwell will do this now
138 2012-07-21 04:35:48 <copumpkin> if you have two chains of the same length, who wins?
139 2012-07-21 04:36:15 <copumpkin> or rather, what should the client do until one of them wins?
140 2012-07-21 04:39:29 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: it just believes the first it heard unless something longer comes along.
141 2012-07-21 04:39:37 <copumpkin> ah, okay
142 2012-07-21 04:39:37 CluckCreek has left ()
143 2012-07-21 04:42:22 <leotreasure> gmaxwell: i'm having trouble deciphering this debug.log file
144 2012-07-21 04:42:26 <doublec> leotreasure: "too much disk io" is normal if you're on a linode. You can change the linode settings so it requires higher io before you get the warning.
145 2012-07-21 04:42:28 <luke-jr> copumpkin: except if it's at a new difficulty, then it picks the harder one
146 2012-07-21 04:42:35 <copumpkin> luke-jr: I see
147 2012-07-21 04:43:08 <leotreasure> thanks doublec i am with vr.org got email warning from a person
148 2012-07-21 04:43:25 <doublec> leotreasure: if it's not running it may have ben OOMed - how much memory does your vps have?
149 2012-07-21 04:43:27 <leotreasure> gmaxwell: is the first line the most recent?
150 2012-07-21 04:43:51 <luke-jr> leotreasure: bottom line is
151 2012-07-21 04:44:08 <leotreasure> doublec: 256MB
152 2012-07-21 04:44:55 <phantomcircuit> leotreasure, what kind of vps?
153 2012-07-21 04:44:57 elkingrey has quit (Quit: Leaving)
154 2012-07-21 04:44:59 <phantomcircuit> xen kvm openvz
155 2012-07-21 04:45:03 <phantomcircuit> lxc?
156 2012-07-21 04:45:30 <copumpkin> so a reorg is simply when another chain gets longer than the one you're believing?
157 2012-07-21 04:45:38 <phantomcircuit> copumpkin, yes
158 2012-07-21 04:45:56 <copumpkin> and if there are two or more competing chains and they keep getting longer than each other, then it'll cause havoc
159 2012-07-21 04:46:02 <phantomcircuit> pretty much
160 2012-07-21 04:46:07 <copumpkin> fair enough
161 2012-07-21 04:46:23 <copumpkin> so the mapping from block hash -> block metadata can be append-only, right?
162 2012-07-21 04:46:24 <phantomcircuit> it's uncommon enough that it's sort of a shrug worthy event
163 2012-07-21 04:46:31 <copumpkin> the only thing that needs undo support is the metadata for the chain you're working on
164 2012-07-21 04:46:56 <phantomcircuit> leotreasure, setup swap
165 2012-07-21 04:47:02 <phantomcircuit> laugh as you use even more disk io
166 2012-07-21 04:47:05 Icoin has quit (Quit: Icoin)
167 2012-07-21 04:47:21 <leotreasure> phantomcircuit: :) ty
168 2012-07-21 04:47:34 <leotreasure> i'm not sure what kind of vps this is or how to find out
169 2012-07-21 04:47:39 <leotreasure> all i see is Cloud Servers - VR256
170 2012-07-21 04:47:44 <phantomcircuit> it's xen i read their website
171 2012-07-21 04:47:57 <leotreasure> ok ty
172 2012-07-21 04:48:09 <galambo_> i would find a bigger vps server that has enough customers so that they don't have time to watch over your shoulder
173 2012-07-21 04:48:30 <phantomcircuit> leotreasure, get a momentovps server it'll handle bitcoind fine
174 2012-07-21 04:48:34 <luke-jr> copumpkin: won't cause havoc for people who wait for 6 confirms :P
175 2012-07-21 04:48:40 <phantomcircuit> (i run that shit show)
176 2012-07-21 04:48:55 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, i believe he was referring to disk io
177 2012-07-21 04:49:08 <copumpkin> luke-jr: conceivably, there could be two competing chains longer than 6 confirms with powerful weird/dishonest miners, right?
178 2012-07-21 04:49:30 <leotreasure> thanks phantomcircuit will check it out
179 2012-07-21 04:49:32 <galambo_> there were two competing chains 53 blocks long once
180 2012-07-21 04:49:33 <luke-jr> copumpkin: that'd be a like 99% attack
181 2012-07-21 04:49:50 <copumpkin> well, some weirdo could keep mining a separate chain, right?
182 2012-07-21 04:49:53 <copumpkin> just for the lulz
183 2012-07-21 04:50:13 <galambo_> i think thats called an altcoin ;)
184 2012-07-21 04:50:14 <copumpkin> without any of the resolution logic
185 2012-07-21 04:50:22 <phantomcircuit> copumpkin, that would be very expensive lulz
186 2012-07-21 04:50:34 <copumpkin> I guess that'd just be considered a fork, then?
187 2012-07-21 04:50:42 <copumpkin> if you don't attempt to reconcile with the other chain?
188 2012-07-21 04:50:44 <phantomcircuit> each block is like
189 2012-07-21 04:50:48 <phantomcircuit> 500USD in btc
190 2012-07-21 04:50:53 <copumpkin> oh, I know
191 2012-07-21 04:50:55 <phantomcircuit> your chain would eventually lose the race
192 2012-07-21 04:51:11 <phantomcircuit> so each block would cost you 500 USD
193 2012-07-21 04:51:19 <phantomcircuit> that adds up pretty fast
194 2012-07-21 04:51:20 <copumpkin> I guess if we kept doing this
195 2012-07-21 04:51:34 <copumpkin> powerful but stupid nodes mining a forked chain
196 2012-07-21 04:51:44 <copumpkin> the difficulty would go down on that chain and everyone would just ignore it
197 2012-07-21 04:51:45 <copumpkin> right?
198 2012-07-21 04:52:26 <phantomcircuit> yeah
199 2012-07-21 04:52:43 <phantomcircuit> when the difficulty recalculation happened the second chain would become 100% prunable
200 2012-07-21 04:52:50 <phantomcircuit> as it would no longer even be valid
201 2012-07-21 04:52:55 <phantomcircuit> well sort of
202 2012-07-21 04:53:20 <phantomcircuit> i guess you could be a dick and cause lots of separate chains
203 2012-07-21 04:53:20 <copumpkin> so difficulty discrepancies in forks are handled by picking the more difficult of them, because it suggests that more people mine on it?
204 2012-07-21 04:53:27 <phantomcircuit> but seriously that would be horrendously expensive
205 2012-07-21 04:53:50 <phantomcircuit> the chain with the most difficulty is always chosen
206 2012-07-21 04:53:55 <phantomcircuit> it's the work calculation
207 2012-07-21 04:54:01 <phantomcircuit> which is more or less inverted target
208 2012-07-21 04:54:10 <phantomcircuit> (not really but close enough)
209 2012-07-21 05:07:46 TransistOrg has joined
210 2012-07-21 05:08:40 Joric has joined
211 2012-07-21 05:08:40 Joric has quit (Changing host)
212 2012-07-21 05:08:40 Joric has joined
213 2012-07-21 05:18:00 MC-Eeepc has joined
214 2012-07-21 05:19:06 Erdon has joined
215 2012-07-21 05:21:25 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
216 2012-07-21 05:23:16 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
217 2012-07-21 05:24:28 MC-Eeepc has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
218 2012-07-21 05:25:11 Guest42555 has joined
219 2012-07-21 05:25:12 Ukto has quit (Disconnected by services)
220 2012-07-21 05:25:15 Guest42555 is now known as Ukto
221 2012-07-21 05:27:12 setkeh has joined
222 2012-07-21 05:28:45 setkeh has quit (Client Quit)
223 2012-07-21 05:29:06 setkeh has joined
224 2012-07-21 05:29:10 setkeh has quit (Client Quit)
225 2012-07-21 05:29:46 setkeh has joined
226 2012-07-21 05:29:57 Ukto has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
227 2012-07-21 05:30:22 Guest42555 has joined
228 2012-07-21 05:30:26 Guest42555 is now known as Ukto
229 2012-07-21 05:35:37 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
230 2012-07-21 05:39:11 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
231 2012-07-21 05:46:40 Ferroh has joined
232 2012-07-21 05:47:18 <jgarzik> anyway
233 2012-07-21 05:47:28 <jgarzik> what does a serialized vector<unsigned char> look like?
234 2012-07-21 05:47:35 <jgarzik> CompactSize + chars ?
235 2012-07-21 05:53:36 optimo has quit (Quit: optimo)
236 2012-07-21 05:56:13 <luke-jr> ;;bc,blocks
237 2012-07-21 05:56:14 <gribble> 190030
238 2012-07-21 05:56:56 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
239 2012-07-21 06:02:59 Diablo-D3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
240 2012-07-21 06:04:44 maaku has joined
241 2012-07-21 06:06:30 Diablo-D3 has joined
242 2012-07-21 06:19:56 Perlboy is now known as Perlbo2
243 2012-07-21 06:20:00 Perlbo2 is now known as Perlboy
244 2012-07-21 06:22:05 setkeh has joined
245 2012-07-21 06:24:17 <luke-jr> 188529 is the last block of blk0001.dat, if no orphans are present
246 2012-07-21 06:27:42 unred2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
247 2012-07-21 06:32:12 ivan\ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
248 2012-07-21 06:33:11 TransistOrg has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
249 2012-07-21 06:33:12 Dyaheon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
250 2012-07-21 06:33:12 jouke has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
251 2012-07-21 06:33:21 Dyaheon has joined
252 2012-07-21 06:33:25 jouke has joined
253 2012-07-21 06:33:42 brocktice has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
254 2012-07-21 06:34:12 mysil2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
255 2012-07-21 06:34:19 mysil2 has joined
256 2012-07-21 06:34:30 ivan\ has joined
257 2012-07-21 06:34:49 brocktice has joined
258 2012-07-21 06:34:49 brocktice has quit (Changing host)
259 2012-07-21 06:34:49 brocktice has joined
260 2012-07-21 06:36:31 Obsi has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
261 2012-07-21 06:37:06 * luke-jr wonders if it would make any performance difference, if the "latest block before wallet was created" were saved, and wallet checking skipped until that block passed
262 2012-07-21 06:40:13 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
263 2012-07-21 06:41:11 unred2 has joined
264 2012-07-21 06:43:15 TransistOrg has joined
265 2012-07-21 06:47:49 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
266 2012-07-21 06:49:25 setkeh has joined
267 2012-07-21 06:49:50 Ferroh has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
268 2012-07-21 06:50:53 justmoon has joined
269 2012-07-21 06:50:57 sirk390 has joined
270 2012-07-21 06:51:57 pickett has joined
271 2012-07-21 06:52:57 d4de has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
272 2012-07-21 06:55:10 unred2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
273 2012-07-21 07:00:19 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
274 2012-07-21 07:05:20 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
275 2012-07-21 07:12:42 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
276 2012-07-21 07:12:56 da2ce7 has joined
277 2012-07-21 07:13:00 copumpkin has joined
278 2012-07-21 07:13:54 Joric has joined
279 2012-07-21 07:23:17 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
280 2012-07-21 07:23:43 molecular has joined
281 2012-07-21 07:24:16 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
282 2012-07-21 07:32:13 banlish has joined
283 2012-07-21 07:32:34 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
284 2012-07-21 07:33:36 setkeh has joined
285 2012-07-21 07:33:37 banlish has quit (Client Quit)
286 2012-07-21 07:41:56 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
287 2012-07-21 07:44:02 setkeh has joined
288 2012-07-21 07:48:49 Marf has joined
289 2012-07-21 07:49:53 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
290 2012-07-21 07:51:41 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
291 2012-07-21 07:52:22 <leotreasure> how come getblockcount doesn't return anything?
292 2012-07-21 07:53:07 Turingi has joined
293 2012-07-21 07:53:58 <leotreasure> & stop doesn't stop
294 2012-07-21 07:54:25 <leotreasure> ctrl z works but is that bad for bitcoind when downloading blockchain?
295 2012-07-21 07:56:57 setkeh has joined
296 2012-07-21 08:03:57 <leotreasure> plz disregard
297 2012-07-21 08:04:47 <leotreasure> different question: how can i issue commands like getblockcount to bitcoind while it is downloading, and not launch another bitcoind process?
298 2012-07-21 08:10:30 word has joined
299 2012-07-21 08:11:27 <dooglus> leotreasure: if you issue commands, it won't start another server
300 2012-07-21 08:13:46 <dooglus> leotreasure: ie. if any command line argument doesn't start with '-' or 'bitcoin:', it's considered to be an RPC client invokation
301 2012-07-21 08:16:47 word has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
302 2012-07-21 08:26:52 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
303 2012-07-21 08:32:10 <leotreasure> thanks dooglus
304 2012-07-21 08:33:25 <leotreasure> does that mean in order to getblockcount i need to connect to bitcoind using -rpcuser username and -rpcpassword pw?
305 2012-07-21 08:41:14 <dooglus> leotreasure: no. you need to set those things in bitcoin.conf
306 2012-07-21 08:41:27 <dooglus> leotreasure: then forget about them
307 2012-07-21 08:41:36 RazielZ has joined
308 2012-07-21 08:41:44 <leotreasure> oh ok thanks!
309 2012-07-21 08:42:02 <dooglus> leotreasure: both the server and client will read the same file
310 2012-07-21 08:42:46 <leotreasure> do you know if it the case that bitcoind is unresponsive to getblockcount command while downloading the blockchain?
311 2012-07-21 08:47:05 Ferroh has joined
312 2012-07-21 08:52:26 <dooglus> leotreasure: while loading the blockchain from disk, it is for sure
313 2012-07-21 08:52:42 <dooglus> leotreasure: while downloading from the network it can be slow, but should respond
314 2012-07-21 08:52:49 LuaKT has joined
315 2012-07-21 08:54:23 <dooglus> leotreasure: I have definitely used 'getblockcount' to monitor the download progress before
316 2012-07-21 08:54:50 <leotreasure> thanks, it's probably taking even longer because i'm running it through ionice
317 2012-07-21 08:55:21 <leotreasure> been waiting at least 10 minutes and still no response
318 2012-07-21 09:07:45 finway has joined
319 2012-07-21 09:08:26 <finway> Hello,devs, i've downloaded blockchain from eu1.bitcoincharts.com/blockchain , how should i import and check it ?
320 2012-07-21 09:16:21 <dooglus> finway: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/4148/659
321 2012-07-21 09:18:31 Erdon has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
322 2012-07-21 09:19:00 unred2 has joined
323 2012-07-21 09:19:40 <finway> thanks, dooglus
324 2012-07-21 09:20:16 <dooglus> finway: when I tried that it took many hours and froze part way through
325 2012-07-21 09:20:28 <dooglus> finway: hopefully you have better luck
326 2012-07-21 09:20:48 <dooglus> alternatively, just use the files you downloaded - unpack into .bitcoin/ and trust...
327 2012-07-21 09:22:34 <finway> I've told sipa can do that, but i don't know how, thanks.
328 2012-07-21 09:22:45 <finway> I've been told
329 2012-07-21 09:32:18 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
330 2012-07-21 09:45:27 Rabbit67890 has joined
331 2012-07-21 09:45:33 Rabbit67890 has quit (Client Quit)
332 2012-07-21 09:46:54 unred_ has joined
333 2012-07-21 09:50:07 unred2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
334 2012-07-21 09:51:35 unred_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
335 2012-07-21 09:54:40 mmoya has joined
336 2012-07-21 09:58:05 sirk390 has joined
337 2012-07-21 09:58:08 danbri has joined
338 2012-07-21 10:14:33 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
339 2012-07-21 10:18:53 MC-Eeepc has joined
340 2012-07-21 10:23:00 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
341 2012-07-21 10:23:35 Diapolo has joined
342 2012-07-21 10:25:29 chmod755 has joined
343 2012-07-21 10:25:52 danbri_ has joined
344 2012-07-21 10:27:30 da2ce7 has joined
345 2012-07-21 10:28:00 [Tycho] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
346 2012-07-21 10:29:12 ThomasV has joined
347 2012-07-21 10:29:20 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
348 2012-07-21 10:32:38 ThomasV has quit (Client Quit)
349 2012-07-21 10:40:00 danbri_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
350 2012-07-21 10:40:35 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
351 2012-07-21 10:44:51 tower has joined
352 2012-07-21 10:46:02 finway has left ()
353 2012-07-21 10:47:16 danbri has joined
354 2012-07-21 10:49:40 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
355 2012-07-21 10:49:50 setkeh has joined
356 2012-07-21 10:50:00 setkeh has quit (Client Quit)
357 2012-07-21 10:50:27 setkeh has joined
358 2012-07-21 10:55:37 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1616 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1616>
359 2012-07-21 10:55:58 toffoo has quit ()
360 2012-07-21 10:57:35 Diapolo has left ()
361 2012-07-21 11:00:40 tsche has quit ()
362 2012-07-21 11:03:45 paraipan has joined
363 2012-07-21 11:05:57 sirk390 has joined
364 2012-07-21 11:06:17 Gnaffel has joined
365 2012-07-21 11:06:38 unred2 has joined
366 2012-07-21 11:10:59 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1617 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1617>
367 2012-07-21 11:12:56 tsche has joined
368 2012-07-21 11:13:06 unred2 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
369 2012-07-21 11:13:34 sgstair has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
370 2012-07-21 11:14:03 sgstair has joined
371 2012-07-21 11:22:07 datagutt has joined
372 2012-07-21 11:22:57 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
373 2012-07-21 11:31:04 MC-Eeepc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
374 2012-07-21 11:34:24 setkeh has joined
375 2012-07-21 11:36:39 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
376 2012-07-21 11:38:30 setkeh has quit (Client Quit)
377 2012-07-21 11:40:53 setkeh has joined
378 2012-07-21 11:43:02 TimothyA has joined
379 2012-07-21 12:00:01 asuk_ has joined
380 2012-07-21 12:02:32 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
381 2012-07-21 12:09:19 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
382 2012-07-21 12:09:49 Dyaheon has quit ()
383 2012-07-21 12:09:51 copumpkin has joined
384 2012-07-21 12:10:27 asuk_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
385 2012-07-21 12:11:07 Gnaffel has quit (Quit: The fish need a smoke, arguments are useless)
386 2012-07-21 12:11:44 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
387 2012-07-21 12:16:17 da2ce7 has joined
388 2012-07-21 12:25:04 eoss has joined
389 2012-07-21 12:25:04 eoss has quit (Changing host)
390 2012-07-21 12:25:04 eoss has joined
391 2012-07-21 12:43:51 minimoose has joined
392 2012-07-21 12:45:10 RastaAssasin_ has joined
393 2012-07-21 12:45:34 Internet13 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
394 2012-07-21 12:47:53 Forexmasterja has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
395 2012-07-21 12:48:42 Forexmasterja has joined
396 2012-07-21 12:49:04 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
397 2012-07-21 12:49:18 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
398 2012-07-21 12:49:44 RastaAssasin_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
399 2012-07-21 12:51:07 sirk390 has joined
400 2012-07-21 12:57:19 B0g4r7_ has joined
401 2012-07-21 12:59:14 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
402 2012-07-21 12:59:14 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
403 2012-07-21 12:59:34 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
404 2012-07-21 13:00:05 da2ce7 has joined
405 2012-07-21 13:01:14 one_zero has quit ()
406 2012-07-21 13:03:28 Internet13 has joined
407 2012-07-21 13:21:31 nouitfvf has joined
408 2012-07-21 13:31:06 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Quit: Linkinus - http://linkinus.com)
409 2012-07-21 13:32:56 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
410 2012-07-21 13:36:38 word has joined
411 2012-07-21 13:38:08 Joric has quit ()
412 2012-07-21 13:43:35 MC1984 has joined
413 2012-07-21 13:45:11 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
414 2012-07-21 13:59:28 gavinandresen has joined
415 2012-07-21 13:59:51 gavinandresen is now known as Guest53079
416 2012-07-21 14:00:49 Guest53079 is now known as gavinonaplane
417 2012-07-21 14:02:59 <jgarzik> gavinonaplane: watch out for snakes
418 2012-07-21 14:03:14 <gavinonaplane> damn, now you got me worried
419 2012-07-21 14:03:35 <gavinonaplane> more likely some slugs, I'm flying home from Seattle
420 2012-07-21 14:06:39 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
421 2012-07-21 14:09:10 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
422 2012-07-21 14:12:26 moartr4dez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
423 2012-07-21 14:15:19 pusle has joined
424 2012-07-21 14:26:43 bobke has quit (Read error: No route to host)
425 2012-07-21 14:26:57 bobke has joined
426 2012-07-21 14:36:40 tonikt has joined
427 2012-07-21 14:41:05 Cory has joined
428 2012-07-21 14:42:48 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
429 2012-07-21 14:56:27 TD has joined
430 2012-07-21 14:56:49 <TD> justmoon: epic
431 2012-07-21 14:56:58 <TD> justmoon: i guess i need to do some squashing of commits now. hmm.
432 2012-07-21 14:57:36 <TD> justmoon: any idea how gavin prefers pull reqs?
433 2012-07-21 14:57:43 <TD> justmoon: with all work-in-progress preserved or squashed ?
434 2012-07-21 14:58:00 Fanquake has joined
435 2012-07-21 14:58:37 Fanquake has quit (Client Quit)
436 2012-07-21 14:58:54 Fanquake has joined
437 2012-07-21 15:05:35 Internet13 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
438 2012-07-21 15:11:30 unknown45682 has quit ()
439 2012-07-21 15:14:10 <gavinonaplane> TD: squashed into logical commits
440 2012-07-21 15:17:07 ahbritto_ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
441 2012-07-21 15:18:13 ahbritto has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
442 2012-07-21 15:18:18 <TD> you're on a plane!
443 2012-07-21 15:18:38 ZephyrVoid has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
444 2012-07-21 15:18:59 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
445 2012-07-21 15:20:19 <TD> gavinonaplane: thanks for adding the SIGHASH flags as an option to signrawtx. that will prove useful in future.
446 2012-07-21 15:24:29 Internet13 has joined
447 2012-07-21 15:26:20 paul0 has joined
448 2012-07-21 15:26:45 <lianj> is there a SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY tx on the mainnet?
449 2012-07-21 15:27:34 chmod755 has left ("PART #bitcoin :PART #bitcoinconsultancy :PART #bitcoin-police-pvt :PART #bitcoin-police :PART #bitcoin-otc :PART #bitcoin-otc-eu :PART #bitcoin-marketing :PART #bitcoin-de :PART #bitcoin-ch :PART #bitcoin-at :ISON EvanR gribble Spenvo nanotube qube23 NickServ")
450 2012-07-21 15:28:18 <TD> lianj: no idea. probably not.
451 2012-07-21 15:28:39 <lianj> TD: hehe ok. just looking for a fixture for tests
452 2012-07-21 15:29:30 <TD> justmoon: i force pushed a rebase to my branch (including your changes)
453 2012-07-21 15:29:48 D34TH has joined
454 2012-07-21 15:30:11 <TD> justmoon: i'll probably merge all of your commits into previous ones, will try and make sure your name shows up in the relevant places .... not sure how git manages commits that are the product of >1 person though
455 2012-07-21 15:37:48 <justmoon> TD: ok
456 2012-07-21 15:38:29 <justmoon> TD: no idea how gavinandresen prefers his pull requests, I assume shaken not stirred
457 2012-07-21 15:38:42 <TD> heh
458 2012-07-21 15:38:44 <TD> he just told me
459 2012-07-21 15:38:53 <TD> there are quite a few commits now so it'll take quite some rebasing
460 2012-07-21 15:40:21 graingert has joined
461 2012-07-21 15:45:46 Hasbro has joined
462 2012-07-21 15:46:00 <jgarzik> mine, mainnet, mine!
463 2012-07-21 15:47:31 gavinonaplane has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
464 2012-07-21 15:48:50 * jgarzik kicks mainnet
465 2012-07-21 15:48:59 <jgarzik> I meant, mine a block with >1 transaction, mainnet.
466 2012-07-21 15:49:56 <TD> https://sites.google.com/site/tmoipv6/lg-mytouch
467 2012-07-21 15:49:57 <TD> cool
468 2012-07-21 15:50:07 <TD> IPv6 for t-mobile usa 3G connections
469 2012-07-21 15:50:07 Internet13 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
470 2012-07-21 15:51:09 gavinonaplane has joined
471 2012-07-21 15:51:52 <luke-jr> TD: yeah, I've had that for over a year now :p
472 2012-07-21 15:51:59 <TD> which network are you with?
473 2012-07-21 15:52:23 <luke-jr> T-Mobile
474 2012-07-21 15:53:01 <TD> which phone do you use?
475 2012-07-21 15:53:07 <TD> their page says only ICS+ androids work.
476 2012-07-21 15:53:12 <TD> but ICS was out in december
477 2012-07-21 15:53:46 * jgarzik grumbles about lazy miners
478 2012-07-21 15:54:27 <luke-jr> TD: I don't use a phone, I use a Nokia N900 handheld computer
479 2012-07-21 15:54:32 <TD> ah ok
480 2012-07-21 15:54:35 <luke-jr> with Gentoo
481 2012-07-21 15:57:57 p0s has joined
482 2012-07-21 16:06:11 <TD> hrmm
483 2012-07-21 16:06:29 <TD> for some reason there's a -lleveldb sneaking in somewhere between the qt.pro -> xcode project conversion
484 2012-07-21 16:17:31 <gavinonaplane> TD: you're welcome RE: the SIGHASH flags. I was tempted to teach createrawtransaction to set lock time (and maybe sequence numbers), but decided that was going too far.
485 2012-07-21 16:17:44 <TD> heh
486 2012-07-21 16:17:59 <TD> those fields will probably end up being set by apps that speak the wire protocol directly
487 2012-07-21 16:18:03 <TD> rather than being API based
488 2012-07-21 16:18:37 <TD> gavinonaplane: do you use the xcode output of qmake on macos or use -spec macx-g++ ?
489 2012-07-21 16:18:44 Internet13 has joined
490 2012-07-21 16:19:54 <gavinonaplane> TD: -spec macx-g++ I think. Is that the default for the macports Qt ?
491 2012-07-21 16:20:08 <TD> not sure where i got my qt from. it defaults to xcode, which sucks
492 2012-07-21 16:20:13 <TD> i only just discovered -spec macx-++
493 2012-07-21 16:21:13 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
494 2012-07-21 16:21:35 <gavinonaplane> One of these months I might learn enough Qt to contribute a patch or two
495 2012-07-21 16:22:10 <gavinonaplane> If only we'd implemented the GUI in OpenGL.....
496 2012-07-21 16:22:30 <TD> hah
497 2012-07-21 16:22:40 <TD> spinning coins are cool
498 2012-07-21 16:22:45 <justmoon> omg best idea ever
499 2012-07-21 16:24:52 leotreasure_ has joined
500 2012-07-21 16:25:13 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
501 2012-07-21 16:25:13 leotreasure_ is now known as leotreasure
502 2012-07-21 16:29:16 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
503 2012-07-21 16:31:01 Fanquake has left ()
504 2012-07-21 16:31:13 <TD> justmoon: migration still takes quite a long time :(
505 2012-07-21 16:31:25 <TD> justmoon: some people will be unhappy with the big delay. but i guess it is a one time cost.
506 2012-07-21 16:31:34 devrandom has joined
507 2012-07-21 16:31:42 * TD wonders if it's worth trying to locate the best bloom filter settings by brute force
508 2012-07-21 16:31:43 <TD> hey devrandom
509 2012-07-21 16:31:56 * jgarzik updates ArtForz' half-a-node
510 2012-07-21 16:32:09 * jgarzik adds a mempool and block database
511 2012-07-21 16:32:17 <justmoon> TD: I think if you're running the original client, you don't mind long delays all that much :P
512 2012-07-21 16:32:24 <TD> yeah
513 2012-07-21 16:32:26 <TD> i'd assume so :)
514 2012-07-21 16:32:27 <justmoon> took about 45 minutes for me
515 2012-07-21 16:32:40 <TD> hmmm
516 2012-07-21 16:32:44 <devrandom> hey TD
517 2012-07-21 16:32:46 <TD> back when i was testing it seemed faster
518 2012-07-21 16:32:58 <jgarzik> TD: one time cost, that won't be seen by new users
519 2012-07-21 16:33:00 <devrandom> mmmm... bloom filters....
520 2012-07-21 16:33:04 <TD> more like 5 minutes. 45 mins is how fast you can rescan the chain with sig checking enabled
521 2012-07-21 16:33:11 <TD> i wonder if there's a regression somewher
522 2012-07-21 16:33:56 <justmoon> hmm you mean on linux it's taking a long time too?
523 2012-07-21 16:33:57 * gavinonaplane will be gavininchicago for a little while, then gavinonaplane again
524 2012-07-21 16:36:19 toffoo has joined
525 2012-07-21 16:37:01 [Tycho] has joined
526 2012-07-21 16:37:25 <TD> justmoon: i'm doing it on osx at the moment.
527 2012-07-21 16:37:29 <TD> i wish i had taken timings for the migration
528 2012-07-21 16:37:38 <TD> it just seemed faster back then. but i was testing with a smaller chain
529 2012-07-21 16:37:55 <TD> i'm seeing 0.01% every 800msec or so, i'd guess
530 2012-07-21 16:38:11 <TD> no unexpected hotspots. spends most of its time deserializing things
531 2012-07-21 16:38:21 gavinonaplane has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
532 2012-07-21 16:38:41 <TD> maybe it would have been better to have some custom code that just iterated across the bdb rather than rescanned the chain from scratch
533 2012-07-21 16:40:01 <gmaxwell> TD: I expect there are a lot of nodes out there with corrupted databases. It's probably better to take the chance to clean that up, rather than have it incorrectly reported as bugs w/ leveldb code.
534 2012-07-21 16:40:18 <TD> what makes you think there are nodes with corrupted databases?
535 2012-07-21 16:40:34 <gmaxwell> I know for a fact that there areâ I just dont know how many.
536 2012-07-21 16:40:39 <TD> oh, ok
537 2012-07-21 16:41:09 <gmaxwell> We get one person every few wees showing up in #bitcoin, or #p2pool with a node stuck because its rejecting a perfectly valid block.
538 2012-07-21 16:41:22 <gmaxwell> er, s/wees/weeks/
539 2012-07-21 16:41:52 <TD> hmm
540 2012-07-21 16:41:57 <justmoon> caused by unclean shutdowns during block download?
541 2012-07-21 16:42:24 <luke-jr> TD: http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/bestblocks.html
542 2012-07-21 16:42:27 <gmaxwell> justmoon: that _shouldn't_ cause that, but e.g. stuff missing from the index for some reason. People are running bitcoin on various 'windows quality hardware', and bitcoin is a great detector of that.
543 2012-07-21 16:42:38 <TD> it looks like p2pools luck has stabilized, at least.
544 2012-07-21 16:42:58 <TD> interesting chart
545 2012-07-21 16:43:10 <TD> luke-jr: why are there so many nodes stuck at 189k? or is that an artifact of your crawl
546 2012-07-21 16:43:21 <luke-jr> TD: most likely
547 2012-07-21 16:43:29 <luke-jr> ;;bc,blocks
548 2012-07-21 16:43:29 <gribble> 190112
549 2012-07-21 16:43:34 <luke-jr> we only just passed 190k
550 2012-07-21 16:43:39 <gmaxwell> http://people.xiph.org/~greg/bestblocks.png
551 2012-07-21 16:43:45 <gmaxwell> ^ probably a little more informative.
552 2012-07-21 16:43:47 sirk390 has joined
553 2012-07-21 16:44:30 <gmaxwell> (as you can see, thats a month old or so)
554 2012-07-21 16:44:42 <TD> yeah
555 2012-07-21 16:44:51 <gmaxwell> In any case, I expect things to be even worse among non-listening nodes... as they're more likely to be on marginal desktop hardware.
556 2012-07-21 16:44:52 <TD> i guess the big jump around 183k is satoshidice starting up
557 2012-07-21 16:45:03 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
558 2012-07-21 16:45:16 Hasbro has quit ()
559 2012-07-21 16:46:21 <TD> gmaxwell: do you think the luck issue is what was holding back p2pool? now it's fixed i'd hope to see usage rise again
560 2012-07-21 16:46:25 <justmoon> TD: oh btw. during migration I accidentally clicked on the splash screen, which caused it to disappear, then I had no more information about the status or progress of the migration until it was finished
561 2012-07-21 16:46:32 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
562 2012-07-21 16:46:36 <TD> justmoon: oh yeah
563 2012-07-21 16:46:39 <TD> justmoon: that's weird
564 2012-07-21 16:46:43 <TD> hadn't noticed that
565 2012-07-21 16:46:54 maaku has joined
566 2012-07-21 16:46:57 <TD> gmaxwell: though i guess it'll take a while for miners to notice that p2pool is no worse than other pools now
567 2012-07-21 16:47:14 <TD> justmoon: i didn't write any code to do that, so i guess it's the splash screens default behavior
568 2012-07-21 16:47:23 <gmaxwell> TD: I don't know that it was ... hard to say. Most 'latecomer' pools have had a hard time breaking this short of share.
569 2012-07-21 16:47:38 <TD> justmoon: it's kind of a crappy hack to abuse the splash in that way. ideally it'd be a real window with a progress bar
570 2012-07-21 16:47:50 <gmaxwell> I think there is are a fair amount of miners that started at some time, picked a pool, and just have no way of discovering other options.
571 2012-07-21 16:47:51 tonikt has quit (Quit: Leaving)
572 2012-07-21 16:47:52 <justmoon> TD: yep, that's my point exactly ;)
573 2012-07-21 16:48:20 <TD> justmoon: i thought about it, but it seemed like a lot of work for something that'll appear exactly one, to a small number of people
574 2012-07-21 16:48:46 Marf has joined
575 2012-07-21 16:49:00 <justmoon> TD: yeah, I had the same thought regarding the performance - seems like it's easier to just bite the bullet and focus on things with more long term benefits
576 2012-07-21 16:49:09 <TD> yeah
577 2012-07-21 16:49:28 <TD> after we get this merged, the next big win is multi-threaded tx verification
578 2012-07-21 16:49:29 <justmoon> maybe an easy fix would be to make the splash screen non-dismissable
579 2012-07-21 16:49:29 <TD> i think
580 2012-07-21 16:49:35 <TD> right
581 2012-07-21 16:49:38 <TD> that'd be how i'd do it :)
582 2012-07-21 16:51:01 CSpitteler has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
583 2012-07-21 16:54:44 unknown45682 has joined
584 2012-07-21 16:57:42 Joric has joined
585 2012-07-21 16:57:42 Joric has quit (Changing host)
586 2012-07-21 16:57:42 Joric has joined
587 2012-07-21 17:00:02 <TD> justmoon: did you switch leveldb to use the boost env on non-win32 platforms as well?
588 2012-07-21 17:01:24 <TD> hmm, nope
589 2012-07-21 17:01:25 <TD> weird
590 2012-07-21 17:01:30 <TD> i wonder why it's got so much slower for me
591 2012-07-21 17:01:42 <xorgate> hm bitcoind.exe always crashes on exit
592 2012-07-21 17:01:53 <TD> justmoon: could you send me some of your ACCEPTED ? blocks in ? msec lines?
593 2012-07-21 17:02:02 <TD> i'm seeing really high variance in how quickly it's processing transactions
594 2012-07-21 17:02:30 <justmoon> you want larger blocks or small ones?
595 2012-07-21 17:02:46 <TD> any
596 2012-07-21 17:02:48 <TD> larger ones
597 2012-07-21 17:02:56 <TD> just want to get a feel for what performance you're seeing
598 2012-07-21 17:03:00 paul0 has joined
599 2012-07-21 17:03:09 <TD> i used to see blocks take only a few msec regardless of how many transactions they had, almost
600 2012-07-21 17:03:20 <TD> now i'm seeing stuff like
601 2012-07-21 17:03:21 <TD> SetBestChain: new best=0000000000000a7b5834 height=156302 work=181285650180642435435 date=12/06/2011 10:36:57
602 2012-07-21 17:03:21 <TD> ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED 120 transactions in 160 msec
603 2012-07-21 17:03:38 <TD> but it's also really variable
604 2012-07-21 17:03:52 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
605 2012-07-21 17:04:17 <TD> eg 18 txns in 1000+ msec
606 2012-07-21 17:04:38 <TD> i was testing migration times on a hdd linux workstation before. i wonder if mac performance is a lot worse
607 2012-07-21 17:05:32 datagutt has joined
608 2012-07-21 17:06:34 <justmoon> I just started a fresh migration and I'm gonna let it run for a bit without doing anything else intensive - during the migration this morning I was using Adobe Premiere, so that probably wouldn't be the cleanest of data :P
609 2012-07-21 17:08:24 <TD> ok
610 2012-07-21 17:08:45 <TD> you're on a windows hdd box?
611 2012-07-21 17:09:42 <justmoon> windows 2x SSD (RAID-0)
612 2012-07-21 17:09:53 <TD> oh
613 2012-07-21 17:09:58 <TD> ok
614 2012-07-21 17:10:01 <TD> i'm on ssd too
615 2012-07-21 17:10:07 <TD> leveldb was designed for hard disks, really
616 2012-07-21 17:10:52 <TD> hmm
617 2012-07-21 17:11:07 <TD> ah crap
618 2012-07-21 17:11:19 <TD> i think the problem is that sophos has taken an interest in the sst files
619 2012-07-21 17:12:18 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
620 2012-07-21 17:12:42 <TD> justmoon: another issue is the crap way i implemented migration. it rewrites blk000?.dat
621 2012-07-21 17:12:47 <TD> for basically no good reason
622 2012-07-21 17:12:53 <TD> so that's a lot of unnecessary disk io right there
623 2012-07-21 17:13:32 <TD> even so. disabling the AV on-access scanning sped things up a lot
624 2012-07-21 17:13:58 CSpitteler has joined
625 2012-07-21 17:14:02 <TD> it's doing about 4h of chain per second now.
626 2012-07-21 17:14:19 <justmoon> yeah, I just turned off eset and from a very unscientific look at the timings I think it's 30-50% faster now
627 2012-07-21 17:14:41 <TD> eset?
628 2012-07-21 17:14:48 <justmoon> best antivirus for windows
629 2012-07-21 17:14:53 <TD> ah
630 2012-07-21 17:15:16 <justmoon> technically eset is the company and NOD32 is the program
631 2012-07-21 17:15:28 <TD> right
632 2012-07-21 17:15:31 <TD> i've heard of nod32
633 2012-07-21 17:15:35 Joric has quit ()
634 2012-07-21 17:16:56 Internet13 has joined
635 2012-07-21 17:17:04 <justmoon> ok, so here are some timings with av on: http://pastebin.com/8UfsnxRd
636 2012-07-21 17:17:44 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
637 2012-07-21 17:17:54 <justmoon> and with av off: http://pastebin.com/60ZnNV4K
638 2012-07-21 17:19:44 <TD> ok that looks kind of reasonable
639 2012-07-21 17:20:29 <TD> it's reliable <1msec per tx though
640 2012-07-21 17:20:55 <TD> i'm still seeing a lot more variability than you
641 2012-07-21 17:26:15 <justmoon> it looks like the migration is cpu-bound for me - bitcoin process is consistently at 25% utilization, i.e. one core
642 2012-07-21 17:29:43 <TD> yeah
643 2012-07-21 17:29:50 <TD> that's what i was seeing as well in the best case
644 2012-07-21 17:29:57 <TD> for some reason on my laptop it's not
645 2012-07-21 17:30:25 <TD> oh well
646 2012-07-21 17:33:05 dvide has quit ()
647 2012-07-21 17:33:55 LuaKT has quit (Changing host)
648 2012-07-21 17:33:55 LuaKT has joined
649 2012-07-21 17:34:48 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
650 2012-07-21 17:35:14 danishman has joined
651 2012-07-21 17:35:16 danishman has left ()
652 2012-07-21 17:39:35 sgornick has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
653 2012-07-21 17:40:09 CodesInChaos has joined
654 2012-07-21 17:40:18 Joric has joined
655 2012-07-21 17:44:22 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
656 2012-07-21 17:45:49 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
657 2012-07-21 17:46:18 sirk390 has joined
658 2012-07-21 18:00:00 <TD> justmoon: https://github.com/mikehearn/bitcoin/commits/leveldb
659 2012-07-21 18:00:08 <TD> justmoon: could you take a quick glance over this? i'll submit it to gavin later
660 2012-07-21 18:00:20 <justmoon> TD: okidoki
661 2012-07-21 18:00:34 <TD> it's gonna take several rounds of review, i'd imagine ....
662 2012-07-21 18:02:19 <luke-jr> TD: hmm, GitHub thinks you have some other pullreqs in there :x
663 2012-07-21 18:02:22 <luke-jr> https://github.com/mikehearn/bitcoin/compare/leveldb
664 2012-07-21 18:03:09 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
665 2012-07-21 18:03:46 <luke-jr> TD: is it possible to build a bitcoind supporting multiple database engines? if not, maybe USE_DBENGINE=bdb/leveldb ?
666 2012-07-21 18:05:00 <TD> that's weird
667 2012-07-21 18:05:05 <TD> why does it show up those extra commits?
668 2012-07-21 18:05:29 <TD> luke-jr: it's not possible with the way the code is written and there is already indeed a USE_LEVELDB build flag
669 2012-07-21 18:06:07 <luke-jr> TD: I mean for the makefiles, not the ifdefs
670 2012-07-21 18:06:26 <TD> yeah, there is. qmake USE_LEVELDB=-
671 2012-07-21 18:06:52 <TD> same for makefile.unix, etc
672 2012-07-21 18:07:03 <TD> it defaults to on
673 2012-07-21 18:07:08 <luke-jr> ⦠I meant using USE_DBENGINE=a/b/c instead of that
674 2012-07-21 18:07:39 <TD> sure. i'm hoping we can scrap the bdb txdb code at some point though. the only reason there's a build flag at all is in case we want to quickly go back to the old system before a release
675 2012-07-21 18:08:00 <luke-jr> the entire leveldb code shouldn't be copied into the bitcoind git repo either :/
676 2012-07-21 18:08:03 <TD> if we end up supporting >2 txdb engines, there'd better be a really good reason for that
677 2012-07-21 18:08:07 <TD> i discussed that with gavin
678 2012-07-21 18:08:21 <TD> we need a slightly branched leveldb, also, the upstream is not packaged and does not support things like "make install"
679 2012-07-21 18:08:29 <luke-jr> -.-
680 2012-07-21 18:08:41 <TD> we need everyone to be on the fastest code, otherwise slow nodes drag everyone else down. so we want this to be the default, really
681 2012-07-21 18:08:59 <luke-jr> fix upstream
682 2012-07-21 18:08:59 <TD> otherwise some builds/distro-packages will just skip it and use bdb. easiest solution is statically linking it in
683 2012-07-21 18:09:14 <luke-jr> distros won't static link it in
684 2012-07-21 18:09:22 <luke-jr> you're just making them just through hoops to bypass it
685 2012-07-21 18:09:29 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: the database engine is part of our distributed algorithim, effectively. It was an error to use a system provided one in the first place.
686 2012-07-21 18:09:31 <TD> it's included in the code, so they have no choice short of major patching, which they should not do
687 2012-07-21 18:10:00 <TD> but yes, distros can and will inflict major brain-damage on whatever code we release. that sort of thing is why we should encourage linux users to use our own binaries or packages
688 2012-07-21 18:10:12 <luke-jr> TD: more likely to major patch than package it with the static link
689 2012-07-21 18:10:16 <TD> upstream doesn't want to include the patches we're using (i checked) because they don't want a boost dependency
690 2012-07-21 18:10:29 <luke-jr> TD: then do it without boost�
691 2012-07-21 18:10:42 <luke-jr> users should never run binaries not provided by their distro
692 2012-07-21 18:10:52 <TD> i'd say the exact opposite :)
693 2012-07-21 18:10:53 <TD> anyway
694 2012-07-21 18:11:09 <TD> if you want to port leveldb to win32 directly, go right ahead. i've got better things to do, as has justmoon
695 2012-07-21 18:11:13 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
696 2012-07-21 18:11:26 <TD> (and get it included into upstream, and make upstream packaged, and ensure distributors include those packages, and build with leveldb, etc)
697 2012-07-21 18:11:33 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: In any case it's not a 'static link' we should just build it internally so there is no conflict with the system (as if the system would package leveldb to begin with)
698 2012-07-21 18:11:46 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: same thing
699 2012-07-21 18:11:51 maaku has joined
700 2012-07-21 18:11:53 <luke-jr> it's bad practice
701 2012-07-21 18:12:19 <justmoon> TD: porting for the native windows build should be pretty trivial at this point, so I may very well do it
702 2012-07-21 18:12:24 <TD> oh, urgh. i bet i know why these commits appeared. i did a rebase with them in at some point
703 2012-07-21 18:12:29 <luke-jr> FreeSWITCH does the same nonsense, except with like 20+ libraries, so they're just not supported by any distro
704 2012-07-21 18:12:36 <TD> which i guess removed the merge commits.
705 2012-07-21 18:12:40 * TD stabs git
706 2012-07-21 18:12:43 <TD> i wonder if it matters
707 2012-07-21 18:13:05 <TD> luke-jr: boohoo. i used to work on Wine, as an upstream developer. distro packaging was a net loss for us and our users, every time
708 2012-07-21 18:13:20 <TD> luke-jr: actually we just refused to bug fix or support any user who ran distro-provided packages because they were so broken
709 2012-07-21 18:13:27 <TD> i suspect freeswitch are quite happy with their state of affairs
710 2012-07-21 18:13:28 <justmoon> TD: if you want me to test/review it with boost 1.49 it'll have to wait until tomorrow
711 2012-07-21 18:13:46 <TD> justmoon: does the boost version matter? the current code seems to work
712 2012-07-21 18:14:10 <luke-jr> TD: doesn't mean it's good for the users
713 2012-07-21 18:14:35 <TD> users were happier when using the upstream provided packages, in our case. distributors tended to introduce subtle bugs as part of "improving" the software
714 2012-07-21 18:14:39 <TD> also see: debian openssl
715 2012-07-21 18:14:40 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: postfan opened issue 1618 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1618>
716 2012-07-21 18:14:44 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: thats for the best wrt freeswitch.
717 2012-07-21 18:15:02 <luke-jr> TD: that's a problem with distros "improving" software; but forcing them to fix bugs ENCOURAGES distro meddling
718 2012-07-21 18:15:22 <luke-jr> and yes, static linking/embedding IS a bug
719 2012-07-21 18:15:27 <gmaxwell> (its better than no one use freeswitch)
720 2012-07-21 18:16:09 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
721 2012-07-21 18:16:10 <TD> including source isn't a bug. it's just a policy decision. in the event that leveldb does a new upstream release, we can just include it and retest
722 2012-07-21 18:16:28 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: Again, the _exact_ behavior of the DB is of critical importance to the distributed bitcoin algorithim. Some modification upstream considers minor like capping the maximum number of records updated in a transaction would potentially destroy bitcoin.
723 2012-07-21 18:16:37 <TD> luke-jr: ok, mis-included commits fixed
724 2012-07-21 18:16:43 asuk has joined
725 2012-07-21 18:16:49 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if it is, that is a bug. db behaviour cannot be part of the protoco;l
726 2012-07-21 18:17:06 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: It's necessarily part of the distributed algorithim.
727 2012-07-21 18:17:41 <gmaxwell> Bitcoin's blockchain is a distributed database... that all nodes have to agree on. So yes the behavior of that database really matters.
728 2012-07-21 18:17:52 <luke-jr> it isn't. the example you gave is clearly a bug, as its behaviour is non-deterministic
729 2012-07-21 18:18:00 <luke-jr> a reorg may overflow the limit in some nodes, but not others
730 2012-07-21 18:18:15 <gmaxwell> As far as freeswitch goes, it's OT, I'll tell you the funny story in private. :)
731 2012-07-21 18:18:35 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: sure because upstream has changed behavior... and bitcoin on some nodes and not others are linking to a different version with different behavior.
732 2012-07-21 18:18:50 <luke-jr> no, because different nodes have different views of the network at different times
733 2012-07-21 18:18:51 <gmaxwell> They might have widely announced this change. But that doesnt help us.
734 2012-07-21 18:19:06 <justmoon> TD: it looks like the update to boost 1.49 is already merged in bitcoin master, so you just need to rebase correctly and the difference should disappear, I'll test with 1.49 on win tomorrow
735 2012-07-21 18:19:20 <luke-jr> if a reorg only has to deal with 1 block, it may succeed, whereas a node which had 2 blocks deep in the old chain might fail
736 2012-07-21 18:19:32 <TD> justmoon: i pushed a rebase just now, so i think it looks good now
737 2012-07-21 18:19:51 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yes, right. There can be no maximum. But if upstream introduces one, it's game over. Which is why the behavior of the database is part of the algorithim, because it can't be permitted to introduce algorithim incompatible limits.
738 2012-07-21 18:20:05 Zarutian has joined
739 2012-07-21 18:20:25 <TD> luke-jr: look at gregorys point a different way. there can be all kinds of bugs in the database layer. if some people get linked against a version that is bug free but dramatically slower for some reason, it's still gonna hose some segment of the network
740 2012-07-21 18:20:55 <TD> some dependencies are just really critical and we need to ensure we control when they're upgraded so they can be tested appropriately
741 2012-07-21 18:21:23 <luke-jr> TD: this is going back to centralization of client
742 2012-07-21 18:21:49 <luke-jr> the network needs to survive regardless of what software any given node runs
743 2012-07-21 18:22:17 <TD> you'll be glad to hear that bluematt did a ton of work to turn bitcoinj into a fully validating implementation, btw :)
744 2012-07-21 18:22:28 <TD> so who knows. maybe implementation diversity isn't far off
745 2012-07-21 18:22:32 <TD> though it's still kinda scary
746 2012-07-21 18:22:36 <TD> for now though, this codebase is it
747 2012-07-21 18:23:19 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
748 2012-07-21 18:23:28 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I'm not saying that everything has to be the same. I'm saying that it all has to be tested and sanity checked for our application.
749 2012-07-21 18:23:59 <luke-jr> TD: it shouldn't be merged so long as it requires a static leveldb IMO
750 2012-07-21 18:24:11 <gmaxwell> The authors of bitcoin software have to take direct responsiblity for making sure that their underlying code doesn't impose any behavioral requirements which would be incompatible with the distributed algorithim. And you can't reliable do that if its changing out from under you.
751 2012-07-21 18:24:15 <TD> gavin can make that call
752 2012-07-21 18:24:19 <TD> btw, amusing/irritating example of how a distributor got their packages blacklisted from upstream developer support in the Wine project
753 2012-07-21 18:24:33 <TD> some genius decided to break the wine package which was one single package upstream, into several smaller ones
754 2012-07-21 18:24:50 <TD> so they decided regedit was a utility, and put it into wine-utils or something like that.
755 2012-07-21 18:25:08 <luke-jr> that sounds logical
756 2012-07-21 18:25:14 <TD> so users stopped getting it installed by default.
757 2012-07-21 18:25:49 <gmaxwell> But regedit is a core part of the win32 system, and you can't run many installers without it.
758 2012-07-21 18:25:52 <TD> FAIL. it has a command line interface and some app installers expect it to be there. they effectively shell out to it, as part of the install process. because it's always present on windows, these apps did not check if the operation succeeded. it cannot fail
759 2012-07-21 18:26:04 <TD> what's more, some apps expect registry entries to be there (because they can't be installed without them)
760 2012-07-21 18:26:09 <TD> yep, gmaxwell has it
761 2012-07-21 18:26:13 Ferroh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
762 2012-07-21 18:26:21 <TD> and the app that got reported to us as "fails on wine" corrupted its memory if some registry entries weren't there
763 2012-07-21 18:26:27 <gmaxwell> ha.. yea, so you'll actually get windows apps mysterously failing. Sucks.
764 2012-07-21 18:26:45 <TD> i burned a couple of evenings trying to reproduce the reported crash until the reported mentioned he was on debian
765 2012-07-21 18:26:48 <luke-jr> sounds like it doesn't support Windows 3.11!
766 2012-07-21 18:27:33 <gmaxwell> Perhaps, but wine's purpose is largely to run the diverse set of vulgar windows applications out there. "The app is bugged" is not much of a useful answer.
767 2012-07-21 18:27:42 <TD> this was a few years ago
768 2012-07-21 18:27:51 <TD> of course it didn't support windows 3.1, though regedit is actually present on that version too
769 2012-07-21 18:27:54 <TD> (it did something a bit different)
770 2012-07-21 18:28:18 <gmaxwell> Likewise, when the bitcoin chain forms two substantial forks "node's on the other half are bugged" isn't much of a consolation to the people suffering, and getting robbed, from the enormous mess left behind.
771 2012-07-21 18:28:40 <luke-jr> well, I would say the correct answer in that case, is that WindowsAppX should be a package too, with dependencies on WINE and regedit ;)
772 2012-07-21 18:28:59 <luke-jr> actually, the WINE pkg should probably be a metapkg depending on regedit+other parts
773 2012-07-21 18:29:33 <TD> sure, if he had ensured that "apt-get install wine" did exactly the same thing as upstream, in a more complicated way, no problem. but of course whenever you get people introducing pointless complexity, you get bugs
774 2012-07-21 18:29:40 <gmaxwell> In any case, if we're really going to mandate the included leveldb we should insert a call into the code that checks the leveldb version and has a big nasty comment with it on how you kill puppies if you build the software with anything else and don't personally validate that it won't fail.
775 2012-07-21 18:30:19 <TD> yeah. i don't know if leveldb has a function that reports its version, actually, but i can check
776 2012-07-21 18:30:26 <luke-jr> either bdb support should remain, system leveldb should be supported, or we're forcing distros to hack things
777 2012-07-21 18:30:28 <TD> maybe there's something in the header files
778 2012-07-21 18:30:42 <TD> no distro is "forced" to hack things. that's a policy choice they make
779 2012-07-21 18:30:45 <TD> it's a dumb one
780 2012-07-21 18:30:50 <luke-jr> if we really need a leveldb fork, that should be a separate git repo we can embed into the main one
781 2012-07-21 18:31:04 <TD> anyway, it's also important linux users upgrade to follow new whitelisted scripts and so on. distros have a terrible track record of this
782 2012-07-21 18:31:07 <luke-jr> TD: willfully creating a bug (static linked fork) forces distros to fix it
783 2012-07-21 18:31:09 <gmaxwell> ^ thats probably a reasonable thing to do.
784 2012-07-21 18:31:10 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
785 2012-07-21 18:31:23 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: we static link wallet.cpp. :)
786 2012-07-21 18:31:26 <TD> i'd actually prefer to detect somehow if the app had been built on linux build servers and then refuse to start :)
787 2012-07-21 18:31:37 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's actually part of the project code
788 2012-07-21 18:31:47 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: so would leveldb be in this case.
789 2012-07-21 18:32:05 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: no.
790 2012-07-21 18:32:16 <gmaxwell> TD: yea, a version whitelisting sounds good.. if upstream doesn't have a get_version() then surely they'd take a patch to add one.
791 2012-07-21 18:32:49 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: would you be made happier if we also renamed it to bitlevel_db ? :)
792 2012-07-21 18:33:00 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: no. -.-
793 2012-07-21 18:33:14 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: there is no need for a fork
794 2012-07-21 18:35:16 <luke-jr> whereas forcing a static fork of leveldb creates a real reason for someone to fork bitcoind (to fix it)
795 2012-07-21 18:37:55 <galambo_> you could always wait for the final product and testing before making a decision
796 2012-07-21 18:39:16 <galambo_> i dont quite understand the extent of this change though. would leveldb replace oracle db entirely
797 2012-07-21 18:39:59 <TD> ok, there's a leveldb::kMajorVersion and leveldb::kMinorVersion
798 2012-07-21 18:40:06 <TD> so not a function but constants, just as good
799 2012-07-21 18:40:07 <gmaxwell> TD: Whats the leveldb upstream position on file format compatiblity?
800 2012-07-21 18:40:39 <TD> i am not expecting leveldb to evolve much further, honestly. it's "done" in the sense that it has met its needs.
801 2012-07-21 18:40:49 <gmaxwell> Right.
802 2012-07-21 18:40:57 <TD> if i compare to bigtable, there's not much delta now they did bloom filtering
803 2012-07-21 18:41:05 <TD> so i don't really know what their format compatibility policy is
804 2012-07-21 18:41:31 danbri has joined
805 2012-07-21 18:41:35 <luke-jr> ⦠so it's unmaintained too? -.-
806 2012-07-21 18:41:37 <gmaxwell> It's just a disk backed hashtable with transaction updates. Whoptie do. And exactly what we need.
807 2012-07-21 18:42:47 <TD> SetBestChain: new best=0000000000000506cbbf height=190107 work=395968689014181958764 date=07/21/2012 16:06:48
808 2012-07-21 18:42:47 <TD> ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED 471 transactions in 2658 msec
809 2012-07-21 18:42:57 <TD> hmph. still not as fast as we need it to be.
810 2012-07-21 18:43:05 <TD> oh well
811 2012-07-21 18:43:24 <gmaxwell> TD: was that node hot-cache on the memory pool?
812 2012-07-21 18:43:31 <TD> probably not
813 2012-07-21 18:43:40 <TD> i'm seeing lots of orphan tx messages after it
814 2012-07-21 18:43:48 * TD wishes the logs had timestamps
815 2012-07-21 18:43:59 <luke-jr> -logtimestamp?
816 2012-07-21 18:44:06 <gmaxwell> o_O
817 2012-07-21 18:44:11 <gmaxwell> Yea.. although
818 2012-07-21 18:44:21 * gmaxwell wishes logtimestamp had more precision.
819 2012-07-21 18:44:22 <luke-jr> -logtimestamps*
820 2012-07-21 18:44:24 <TD> ah
821 2012-07-21 18:44:25 <TD> thanks
822 2012-07-21 18:44:27 <TD> didn't know about that
823 2012-07-21 18:44:42 justmoon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
824 2012-07-21 18:44:51 * luke-jr wonders if there's any easy way to verify BlueMatt's prune branch worked correctly :/
825 2012-07-21 18:45:03 <gmaxwell> TD: they dont have timestamps just to reduce their value for someone trying to deanonymize nodes to go around demanding logs from people.
826 2012-07-21 18:45:11 <TD> yeah, i remember
827 2012-07-21 18:45:54 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
828 2012-07-21 18:46:03 <luke-jr> 349 MB saved by pruning indexâ¦
829 2012-07-21 18:46:15 <luke-jr> (per datadir)
830 2012-07-21 18:47:22 <gmaxwell> Ultraprune is a lot more interesting, as it reduces the working set to something like 100mb now.
831 2012-07-21 18:47:41 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: what more does it get rid of?
832 2012-07-21 18:47:44 toffoo has quit ()
833 2012-07-21 18:47:59 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I'm just trying to make a one-shot "base datadir" to copy everywhere (and hardlink blk0001.dat)
834 2012-07-21 18:48:05 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: it seperate block storage from the data needed for validation.
835 2012-07-21 18:48:16 <luke-jr> O.o
836 2012-07-21 18:48:22 <luke-jr> that's ⦠already separate?
837 2012-07-21 18:48:41 <gmaxwell> so basically the blocks are just for archival. Then there is a 100mbyte txout database, which _only_ indexes txouts.
838 2012-07-21 18:49:00 <luke-jr> i c
839 2012-07-21 18:49:08 <gmaxwell> So the only time it ever reads the blocks is when feeding a new node, or during a reorg.
840 2012-07-21 18:49:26 <luke-jr> I guess I'd notice if my own private nodes break, so I can take this risk
841 2012-07-21 18:49:42 <gmaxwell> The blocks are also seperated into many files, so sharing them would be easier.
842 2012-07-21 18:50:20 <luke-jr> -rw-r--r-- 1 luke-jr luke-jr 2097361271 Jul 21 14:48 blk0001.dat
843 2012-07-21 18:50:21 <luke-jr> -rw-r--r-- 1 luke-jr luke-jr 158613504 Jul 21 18:36 blkindex.dat
844 2012-07-21 18:54:43 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
845 2012-07-21 18:55:08 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: mikehearn opened pull request 1619 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1619>
846 2012-07-21 18:55:15 copumpkin has joined
847 2012-07-21 18:57:51 <TD> luke-jr: btw thanks for implementing fee dependency calculations
848 2012-07-21 18:58:01 * TD hopes to see that patch or something similar merged soon
849 2012-07-21 18:58:45 <luke-jr> TD: Gavin seems to be reinventing that change (probably for the better), so hopefully he'll add that feature back in before merging it
850 2012-07-21 19:00:51 <gmaxwell> hm. leveldb seems to be light on tests... we should probably have at least a buildtime test of a large reorg.
851 2012-07-21 19:01:58 <TD> yeah, some tests of the txdb code would be good in general (doesn't have to be ldb specific)
852 2012-07-21 19:03:07 <luke-jr> some of my pullreqs have some
853 2012-07-21 19:03:12 <luke-jr> but they do focus on other stuff
854 2012-07-21 19:03:42 <luke-jr> (in particular, it sets up the db env in memory and builds a 100+ block chain)
855 2012-07-21 19:03:57 <luke-jr> (speaking of which, does LevelDB work with memory-only db environmentsâ)
856 2012-07-21 19:04:28 <copumpkin> does anyone know of a document (maybe threads on the forum?) discussing all sorts of reorg scenarios and how things would work during them?
857 2012-07-21 19:04:40 <gmaxwell> I suppose that test should actually run on disk in any caseâ the rationale being that the db enviroment may have different bugs for those cases.
858 2012-07-21 19:04:49 <copumpkin> I have this unit test which looks handy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=46370.0
859 2012-07-21 19:05:00 <copumpkin> but was curious about other higher-level discussions of the behavior
860 2012-07-21 19:05:08 <copumpkin> I'd like to implement it correctly, obviously :)
861 2012-07-21 19:05:14 <TD> luke-jr: hm, not really. i guess you can start a transaction and never finish it. that would amount to the same thing
862 2012-07-21 19:05:29 <TD> (well, a batch)
863 2012-07-21 19:05:34 <TD> though it does exercise very different codepaths
864 2012-07-21 19:05:35 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: I mean, the high level behavior is that you must end up in an identical state to the dead fork never having existed.
865 2012-07-21 19:05:37 <luke-jr> test_bitcoin shouldn't touch my datadir IMO
866 2012-07-21 19:05:55 <luke-jr> I suppose a temp dir would be workable
867 2012-07-21 19:06:04 <TD> yeah. tests usually have a temp dir of their own
868 2012-07-21 19:06:10 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yea, a temp dir, obviously.
869 2012-07-21 19:07:00 <TD> didn't sipa refactor things so re-orgs no longer create gigantic db transactions?
870 2012-07-21 19:07:03 <luke-jr> my tests are for the block creation and smart time code mainly, so what is ideal for db testing wasn't the focus
871 2012-07-21 19:07:10 <luke-jr> TD: in some cases they need to
872 2012-07-21 19:07:26 <TD> or rather, he changed things so the code doesn't expect an uncommitted db txn to be reflected in read operations
873 2012-07-21 19:07:50 <luke-jr> TD: all the reverse-a-blocks need to be in the same txn still
874 2012-07-21 19:07:54 <TD> there is some inefficient O(N) code in there that allows you to read back from an uncommitted batch, but i think sipa removed the need for it. at least in the current code.
875 2012-07-21 19:07:58 <luke-jr> and the same number of blocks forward on the new chain
876 2012-07-21 19:08:08 <TD> but yeah, good point about the huge re-orgs
877 2012-07-21 19:08:10 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: I mean the conditions under which you'd get branches in the first place, especially ones starting farther back
878 2012-07-21 19:09:01 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: the only condition which should create them is block races.
879 2012-07-21 19:09:14 <copumpkin> even in the presence of evil nodes?
880 2012-07-21 19:09:16 <gmaxwell> Broken nodes do too, however.
881 2012-07-21 19:09:43 <copumpkin> for example, what kind of rules are there on relaying really weird older chains?
882 2012-07-21 19:10:00 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: You only relay blocks from your current best chain.
883 2012-07-21 19:10:07 <gmaxwell> You will not relay a disconnected block.
884 2012-07-21 19:10:36 <copumpkin> so unless a broken/malicious node relays you a chain branched off way back directly, you probably won't see them
885 2012-07-21 19:11:28 <gmaxwell> Correct. And you won't do anything with them when you do see them accept keep them around... you'll only do things with them if they become part of the longest.
886 2012-07-21 19:14:05 <luke-jr> hrm, blk0001.dat doesn't compress very well :<
887 2012-07-21 19:14:30 <gmaxwell> You expected otherwise?
888 2012-07-21 19:14:33 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: I see, I think
889 2012-07-21 19:15:30 <copumpkin> a lot of this logic doesn't seem too hard to specify formally in a language like agda. The difficulty proofs of breaking hashes and stuff I wouldn't want to touch, but protocol rules and the like are nice and discrete and could be encoded fairly easily
890 2012-07-21 19:16:52 <copumpkin> at least at first glance :)
891 2012-07-21 19:16:52 <copumpkin> also, script doesn't seem too hard to prove things about, either
892 2012-07-21 19:17:04 <copumpkin> it's fairly easy to encode a stack language like that
893 2012-07-21 19:17:25 <copumpkin> if only I had more time for this stuff :)
894 2012-07-21 19:19:20 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: yes
895 2012-07-21 19:19:26 <luke-jr> most of blk0001.dat should be redundant
896 2012-07-21 19:19:53 <copumpkin> you mean all the repeated hashes as references?
897 2012-07-21 19:20:27 <copumpkin> it doesn't seem like there'd be that much repetition, but you could compress hash references into simply file offset references once you've verified them
898 2012-07-21 19:20:46 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: it's not like your compressor knows how and where to runs sha256. :)
899 2012-07-21 19:24:08 Joric has quit ()
900 2012-07-21 19:25:29 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: still, multiuse addresses, numbers, etcâ¦
901 2012-07-21 19:29:42 sgornick has joined
902 2012-07-21 19:36:03 <xorgate> suppose i wish to make a program that uses bitcoind rpc interface to get a list of received txs, and send them back. how would i figure out what address to send to, i know the tx id
903 2012-07-21 19:36:55 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
904 2012-07-21 19:37:00 <gmaxwell> xorgate: It's really inadvisable to try to do that.
905 2012-07-21 19:37:14 Erdon has joined
906 2012-07-21 19:37:16 <luke-jr> xorgate: impossible with bitcoind
907 2012-07-21 19:37:22 <gmaxwell> There is no 'from' address in bitcoin, the closest you can get is the prior destination.
908 2012-07-21 19:37:30 <luke-jr> xorgate: and it's possible that it wasn't even sent from a valid address
909 2012-07-21 19:37:49 <xorgate> how does satoshidice do this/work around this ?
910 2012-07-21 19:37:56 <gmaxwell> But the prior destination may not be representable as an address, the sender may have no way of recovering the coins anymore, or they might go to another party entirely.
911 2012-07-21 19:37:58 <luke-jr> xorgate: it doesn't work right
912 2012-07-21 19:38:58 <copumpkin> it works for most transactions it receives, but it's kind of an incorrect model
913 2012-07-21 19:39:07 <copumpkin> to ever try to send coins "back to the sender"
914 2012-07-21 19:39:27 xorgate has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
915 2012-07-21 19:39:57 <luke-jr> sigh, 1.3 GB
916 2012-07-21 19:40:07 <luke-jr> I was going to publish this, but now I'm not sure I want to :P
917 2012-07-21 19:40:18 <copumpkin> oh, a signed blk001.dat?
918 2012-07-21 19:40:23 <copumpkin> +0
919 2012-07-21 19:40:37 <luke-jr> copumpkin: I could sign it, but the main reason is because it's the minimal blk0001.dat that can just be hardlinked everywhere
920 2012-07-21 19:40:41 xorgate has joined
921 2012-07-21 19:40:59 <gmaxwell> its trivial enough to make your own.
922 2012-07-21 19:41:06 wizkid057 has joined
923 2012-07-21 19:41:06 <xorgate> oof. did i miss anything? last was 'it doesn't work right'
924 2012-07-21 19:41:08 <copumpkin> xorgate: we were telling you that the basic model of "send back to sender" doesn't make sense in bitcoin the protocol, but works in most cases right now
925 2012-07-21 19:41:14 <gmaxwell> and non-trivial enough to install it in a way that can be hardlinked.
926 2012-07-21 19:41:14 comboy has joined
927 2012-07-21 19:41:30 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it's not really trivial to make IMO
928 2012-07-21 19:41:49 rdponticelli has joined
929 2012-07-21 19:41:51 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: you just -connect to another isolated node that has the full chain, no?
930 2012-07-21 19:42:06 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: hmm, I wonder if that might work
931 2012-07-21 19:42:13 <luke-jr> I wrote a Python script to build it <.<
932 2012-07-21 19:42:31 <gmaxwell> it should work.
933 2012-07-21 19:42:40 <luke-jr> so long as the other node is isolated..
934 2012-07-21 19:42:47 nouitfvf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
935 2012-07-21 19:42:54 <luke-jr> if it receives a block while you're doing it, it'll send that first and go out of order :/
936 2012-07-21 19:43:01 <gmaxwell> right.
937 2012-07-21 19:43:19 <luke-jr> plus, you'd need to do some magic to get it to stop at the right block
938 2012-07-21 19:43:34 <luke-jr> at least blkindex is only 61 MB xz'd
939 2012-07-21 19:43:51 nouitfvf has joined
940 2012-07-21 19:46:26 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: wizkid057 claims to have converted the file to hex plaintext and compressed it under 200 MB :|
941 2012-07-21 19:46:36 <wizkid057> not hex
942 2012-07-21 19:46:39 <luke-jr> oh?
943 2012-07-21 19:47:03 <luke-jr> then?
944 2012-07-21 19:47:05 <wizkid057> the result of getblock for every non-orphan
945 2012-07-21 19:47:17 <wizkid057> in plaintext
946 2012-07-21 19:47:33 <wizkid057> then bzip2'd
947 2012-07-21 19:47:38 <luke-jr> 7aac5826b91b4f87a2e9534e0e38e8d64ed21aff8a4eb8ff8dde4e726e67fe1a blk0001.dat
948 2012-07-21 19:47:46 <luke-jr> wizkid057: oh, I bet that's missing a lot of info
949 2012-07-21 19:47:51 * wizkid057 shrugs
950 2012-07-21 19:47:54 <wizkid057> its every block
951 2012-07-21 19:47:58 <wizkid057> how could it be missing anything?
952 2012-07-21 19:48:43 Joric has joined
953 2012-07-21 19:48:43 Joric has quit (Changing host)
954 2012-07-21 19:48:43 Joric has joined
955 2012-07-21 19:48:53 Dyaheon has joined
956 2012-07-21 19:49:27 <luke-jr> wizkid057: scripts?
957 2012-07-21 19:49:51 <wizkid057> http://pool.wizkid057.com/block190127.txt
958 2012-07-21 19:50:21 <wizkid057> i never bothered to look at tx, but, i'd assume thats the transactions in some form...
959 2012-07-21 19:50:25 <copumpkin> yeah, that doesn't contain the full transactions
960 2012-07-21 19:50:36 <wizkid057> well that'd explain things then :P
961 2012-07-21 19:50:52 <copumpkin> :)
962 2012-07-21 19:51:05 <wizkid057> so wait, whats tx then in this context? lol
963 2012-07-21 19:51:28 <copumpkin> the hash of the transaction data, I think
964 2012-07-21 19:51:32 <luke-jr> wizkid057: it's just the txid
965 2012-07-21 19:51:38 <wizkid057> ah
966 2012-07-21 19:51:42 <wizkid057> so need a lot more data then
967 2012-07-21 19:51:51 <copumpkin> for example, you take the top guy on that list
968 2012-07-21 19:51:54 <copumpkin> and feed it into http://blockchain.info/tx-index/12988316/6985f5f9f02bf2276834e2eef18347059ff144d8048e075e4b4146f415a0c90d
969 2012-07-21 19:52:00 <luke-jr> wizkid057: there USED to be a way to get the full data, but some people insisted on removing it :<
970 2012-07-21 19:52:02 <copumpkin> it's 143 bytes, that particular one
971 2012-07-21 19:52:08 <wizkid057> :-\
972 2012-07-21 19:52:36 <luke-jr> now you get to write a script to iterate over each transaction and call getrawtransaction on it
973 2012-07-21 19:52:50 <copumpkin> at that point, you might as well consume the blk0001.dat yourself
974 2012-07-21 19:52:50 RazielZ has joined
975 2012-07-21 19:52:57 <wizkid057> lol
976 2012-07-21 19:53:01 <copumpkin> it isn't that much work
977 2012-07-21 19:53:19 <wizkid057> well, i actually was just dumping the getblock data to do some other statistics
978 2012-07-21 19:53:45 <wizkid057> saw a block of hex for "tx" and just assumed that was the transactions in raw form, never bothered to check them
979 2012-07-21 19:53:51 <wizkid057> since I didnt need them
980 2012-07-21 19:53:52 <wizkid057> hehe
981 2012-07-21 19:54:00 <copumpkin> so does bitcoind trust its on-disk store? or does it verify hashes when it starts up?
982 2012-07-21 19:54:23 <copumpkin> I noticed it does take a while to start up :)
983 2012-07-21 19:54:30 <copumpkin> well, bitcoin-qt anyway
984 2012-07-21 19:55:38 <wizkid057> i used to be pretty badass with compression of structured data a while back using some custom mangling
985 2012-07-21 19:55:51 <luke-jr> copumpkin: it mostly trusts it
986 2012-07-21 19:56:00 <luke-jr> copumpkin: recent versions check the last 1000 blocks or somehting
987 2012-07-21 19:56:03 <copumpkin> I see
988 2012-07-21 19:56:12 <wizkid057> luke-jr: how small can you get your stripped blk0001.dat?
989 2012-07-21 19:56:18 <luke-jr> wizkid057: 1.3 GB
990 2012-07-21 19:56:21 * copumpkin will bbl, thanks for the help
991 2012-07-21 19:56:52 <wizkid057> would probably need a custom compression algo to get it smaller
992 2012-07-21 19:56:59 <luke-jr> -rw-r--r-- 1 luke-jr luke-jr 1356937600 Jul 21 14:48 blk0001.dat.xz
993 2012-07-21 19:57:01 <luke-jr> -rw-r--r-- 1 luke-jr luke-jr 63706028 Jul 21 18:36 blkindex.dat.xz
994 2012-07-21 19:58:14 <wizkid057> i mean, I could probably, with decent effort, make something specific to the blockchain to drop it down substantially at the cost of a lot of CPU to unpack it
995 2012-07-21 19:58:42 <luke-jr> probably
996 2012-07-21 19:58:51 <gmaxwell> Sipa has already done this... but it just wasn't that impressive.
997 2012-07-21 19:59:02 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: did he eliminate all hashes?
998 2012-07-21 19:59:07 <wizkid057> well, you have to think, you dont need to store the hashes
999 2012-07-21 19:59:09 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1000 2012-07-21 19:59:10 <wizkid057> yeah, lol
1001 2012-07-21 19:59:17 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
1002 2012-07-21 19:59:33 <wizkid057> as long as an ordering is maintained you could drop them
1003 2012-07-21 19:59:35 <gmaxwell> and compressed the signatures... there is a bunch of stuff that can be done, but, meh.
1004 2012-07-21 19:59:38 <luke-jr> for a single solid file, you could just store varint byte offsets
1005 2012-07-21 20:00:06 guruvan_ has joined
1006 2012-07-21 20:00:16 <luke-jr> but yeah, I guess the sigs are pretty uncompressable :/
1007 2012-07-21 20:00:22 <gmaxwell> forget byte offsets, you'd store optimally coded unsigned integers indexing the set of qualified transactions.
1008 2012-07-21 20:00:32 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: true
1009 2012-07-21 20:00:52 <gmaxwell> If you want to be really awesome you can limit the last txin index to the set of transactions which would be big enough to satisify the explicit outputs.
1010 2012-07-21 20:00:58 <wizkid057> dont even really need to store it optimally if you can drop the bulk of the random data
1011 2012-07-21 20:01:05 <wizkid057> generic compression algos arent bad at repeated bits
1012 2012-07-21 20:01:09 <gmaxwell> (and by awesome I mean hundreds of lines of code to save like .. 50 bytes)
1013 2012-07-21 20:02:01 <wizkid057> how many transactions are in the chain anyway?
1014 2012-07-21 20:02:29 <luke-jr> 12988251 according to blockchain.info I guess
1015 2012-07-21 20:02:35 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1016 2012-07-21 20:02:43 <luke-jr> but that might include some not in the chain
1017 2012-07-21 20:04:17 sgornick has joined
1018 2012-07-21 20:05:48 <wizkid057> hmm... so judging by that you could save at least a few hundred MB by dropping the uncompressable hashes
1019 2012-07-21 20:06:56 <wizkid057> 13M hashes wouldnt take long, even on an older machine, to regenerate
1020 2012-07-21 20:14:01 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1021 2012-07-21 20:15:09 <cosurgi> what is the expected date when block reward drops to 25 BTC?
1022 2012-07-21 20:15:19 <wizkid057> sometime in november i think
1023 2012-07-21 20:15:26 <cosurgi> thx :)
1024 2012-07-21 20:15:29 <gmaxwell> ;;bc,halfreward
1025 2012-07-21 20:15:30 <gribble> Estimated time of bitcoin block reward halving: Thu Dec 6 12:10:00 2012 | Time remaining: 19 weeks, 5 days, 0 hours, and 0 seconds
1026 2012-07-21 20:15:37 <wizkid057> oh december now
1027 2012-07-21 20:15:55 <cosurgi> :)
1028 2012-07-21 20:15:55 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: thats not new.
1029 2012-07-21 20:16:05 <cosurgi> ;;bc,quarterreward
1030 2012-07-21 20:16:06 <gribble> Error: "bc,quarterreward" is not a valid command.
1031 2012-07-21 20:16:08 <cosurgi> ;-)
1032 2012-07-21 20:16:10 <wizkid057> didnt know that command existed...
1033 2012-07-21 20:16:18 <cosurgi> me neither
1034 2012-07-21 20:16:25 <wizkid057> i did the math myself before and came up with end of november
1035 2012-07-21 20:17:51 <cosurgi> I remember Anderson talking about a feature that multiple signatures will be needed to transfer money. A feature used for protecting banks from capturing wallets. He said - each key stored in different location. And all wallets wopuld need to be captured by evildoers to steal money.
1036 2012-07-21 20:18:05 <cosurgi> Do you remember that he was talking about that?
1037 2012-07-21 20:18:27 <cosurgi> I'm curious if it has been already implemented? I think that I first read about it 3 months ago or so.
1038 2012-07-21 20:18:56 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1039 2012-07-21 20:19:19 <cosurgi> if I spent some time searching I might even find the link for his post.
1040 2012-07-21 20:20:52 [\\\] has joined
1041 2012-07-21 20:21:48 <TD> cosurgi: yes
1042 2012-07-21 20:21:56 <TD> cosurgi: parts of it are implemented
1043 2012-07-21 20:23:37 superman2016 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1044 2012-07-21 20:25:12 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1045 2012-07-21 20:26:23 <jgarzik> w00t
1046 2012-07-21 20:26:36 word has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1047 2012-07-21 20:26:39 <jgarzik> loadblock fails, but the very first initial block download succeeded!
1048 2012-07-21 20:26:54 <jgarzik> (grafting a block db into half-a-node)
1049 2012-07-21 20:27:14 [\\\] has joined
1050 2012-07-21 20:27:19 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1051 2012-07-21 20:29:03 pickett has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1052 2012-07-21 20:29:38 guruvan has quit (Excess Flood)
1053 2012-07-21 20:29:39 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
1054 2012-07-21 20:29:45 pickett has joined
1055 2012-07-21 20:30:31 superman2016 has joined
1056 2012-07-21 20:33:14 d4de has joined
1057 2012-07-21 20:33:14 d4de has quit (Changing host)
1058 2012-07-21 20:33:14 d4de has joined
1059 2012-07-21 20:33:45 OneFixt has joined
1060 2012-07-21 20:36:03 <jgarzik> chain imports sure are fast, when you don't verify connectedness or signatures
1061 2012-07-21 20:37:07 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1062 2012-07-21 20:39:27 guruvan has quit (Quit: oh noessss)
1063 2012-07-21 20:40:10 guruvan has joined
1064 2012-07-21 20:40:20 bakh has joined
1065 2012-07-21 20:40:42 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1066 2012-07-21 20:40:50 guruvan_ has joined
1067 2012-07-21 20:41:43 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1068 2012-07-21 20:45:28 ahbritto has joined
1069 2012-07-21 20:51:44 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1070 2012-07-21 20:54:04 RazielZ has joined
1071 2012-07-21 21:06:37 pusle has quit ()
1072 2012-07-21 21:10:30 toffoo has joined
1073 2012-07-21 21:10:38 Obsi has joined
1074 2012-07-21 21:15:03 sytse has joined
1075 2012-07-21 21:16:41 graingert has joined
1076 2012-07-21 21:16:41 bakh has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1077 2012-07-21 21:17:08 <graingert> it would be nice to use the system keychain for the password
1078 2012-07-21 21:18:17 bakh has joined
1079 2012-07-21 21:21:20 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1080 2012-07-21 21:22:32 [\\\] has joined
1081 2012-07-21 21:26:09 rdponticelli has joined
1082 2012-07-21 21:30:27 bakh has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1083 2012-07-21 21:31:43 bakh has joined
1084 2012-07-21 21:33:00 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1085 2012-07-21 21:40:33 nouitfvf has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1086 2012-07-21 21:41:11 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1087 2012-07-21 21:42:14 [\\\] has joined
1088 2012-07-21 21:49:20 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1089 2012-07-21 21:49:35 [\\\] has joined
1090 2012-07-21 21:53:25 <jgarzik> -rw-rw-r-- 1 jgarzik jgarzik 2369881499 Jul 21 17:33 blocks.dat
1091 2012-07-21 21:53:43 <jgarzik> gdbm database, key uint256, value serialized CBlock
1092 2012-07-21 21:53:57 <TD> hmm
1093 2012-07-21 21:54:07 <TD> does anyone know why the wallet contains supporting transactions?
1094 2012-07-21 21:54:12 <TD> satoshi must have had a use case for this in mind
1095 2012-07-21 21:55:18 <TD> oh, i see. it's used for relaying
1096 2012-07-21 21:59:16 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1097 2012-07-21 22:01:29 [\\\] has joined
1098 2012-07-21 22:08:13 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1099 2012-07-21 22:10:34 [\\\] has joined
1100 2012-07-21 22:16:57 Joric has quit ()
1101 2012-07-21 22:19:52 copumpkin is now known as latroia
1102 2012-07-21 22:19:59 latroia is now known as copumpkin
1103 2012-07-21 22:20:16 bakh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1104 2012-07-21 22:20:26 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1105 2012-07-21 22:24:14 pecket has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1106 2012-07-21 22:26:01 maaku has joined
1107 2012-07-21 22:29:14 pecket has joined
1108 2012-07-21 22:35:09 egecko has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1109 2012-07-21 22:36:59 toffoo has quit ()
1110 2012-07-21 22:37:13 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1111 2012-07-21 22:39:23 [\\\] has joined
1112 2012-07-21 22:44:18 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1113 2012-07-21 22:45:06 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1114 2012-07-21 22:47:57 LuaKT has quit ()
1115 2012-07-21 22:50:31 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1116 2012-07-21 22:51:36 [\\\] has joined
1117 2012-07-21 22:54:00 MC1984 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1118 2012-07-21 22:54:00 Erdon has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1119 2012-07-21 22:54:32 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1120 2012-07-21 22:57:47 ahbritto has joined
1121 2012-07-21 23:15:59 Joric has joined
1122 2012-07-21 23:15:59 Joric has quit (Changing host)
1123 2012-07-21 23:15:59 Joric has joined
1124 2012-07-21 23:19:11 Wack0 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1125 2012-07-21 23:20:08 Wack0 has joined
1126 2012-07-21 23:20:38 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1127 2012-07-21 23:22:47 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1128 2012-07-21 23:23:11 Marf has joined
1129 2012-07-21 23:34:46 maaku has joined
1130 2012-07-21 23:34:57 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
1131 2012-07-21 23:38:56 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1132 2012-07-21 23:40:07 [\\\] has joined
1133 2012-07-21 23:41:28 maaku has joined
1134 2012-07-21 23:43:34 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
1135 2012-07-21 23:47:18 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1136 2012-07-21 23:47:28 [\\\] has joined
1137 2012-07-21 23:59:18 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1138 2012-07-21 23:59:46 [\\\] has joined