saranshsharma has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
saranshs_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
saranshs_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
vnogueira has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
vnogueira has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
mikehu44 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jb55 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
ray has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ray is now known as Guest3449
Guest3449 has quit [Client Quit]
Guest9040 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest9040 has quit [Client Quit]
yanmaani has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
jespada has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
jespada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jespada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
vasild has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
geyaeb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kexkey has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sdfgsdfg has quit [Quit: ZzzZ]
mikehu44 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mikehu44 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
yanmaani has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yousser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
earnestly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
yanmaani has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<MarcoFalke>
jeremyrubin: I agree with you that "we should remove almost everything that isn't required to keep a node operating". I think the issue is that users are already relying on some modules (like the gui, or wallet), so removing is likely not an option.
<MarcoFalke>
Though, I think we can improve modularization and make modules optional to compile.
<MarcoFalke>
So it would even be possible to "remove" the mempool, for example. See e.g. #22850
<MarcoFalke>
In the same way the rest interface could be "removed" (and just any other module that isn't needed for a full node)
ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ghost43 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
geyaeb has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
geyaeb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
yanmaani has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
arythmetic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
instead of removing everything that isn't required i like the libbitcoinkernel direction more, isolate the consensus code, it allows you to use that within anything else if you don't agree with what bitcoin core offers
<laanwj>
the same discussions about what has to be removed just don't help, no one is going to agree on that
<laanwj>
jamesob: yes, i tried both, unfortunately 100% of the tries failed
<jonatack>
laanwj: (a) agree (b) the comments in both pulls don't seem hostile, maybe they just needed more responsive/timely review iiuc
masta`` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
jonatack: i don't think i stopped because of hostility, it did feel like lack of interest, but maybe i was reading too much into it (i mean, development goes slow here)... i don't really blame anyone, to be clera
<laanwj>
i would like to pick it up again (there does seem to be interest, it's one of the more talked about closed feature PRs), but my brain doesn't cooperate at the moment
<jonatack>
can relate
yanmaani has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
littlesh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
realies has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
realies has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
mikehu44 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<jamesob>
laanwj: definitely think it's worth taking a shot at resurrecting them both, but of course that isn't an ask of you
arythmetic has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
arythmetic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
arythmetic has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jb55 has quit [Changing host]
jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
arythmetic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jb55 has quit [Quit: jb55]
jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
vnogueira has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
vnogueira has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<michaelfolkson>
Is anyone deliberately using multiprocess for development yet (other than testing/reviewing multiprocess itself)? I'm assuming you could save on build/compile time by not having to recompile wallet, GUI for many PRs
<sipa>
You can build without wallet/gui if you don't want to.
<sipa>
With or without multiprocess.
<jeremyrubin>
Marcofalke: in my view we want 3 projects to happen: 1 Bitcoin kernel to make consensus boundaries clear, 2 multiprocess to separate out things that don't need to share memory (most important imo would be having the network threads only able to message pass safely to core) and then 3 minimal node where bits of functionality in core are replaced
<jeremyrubin>
with projects that only access things in core by API.
<jeremyrubin>
I think all 3 have big benefits and are not an either or issue. They synergize.
<michaelfolkson>
sipa: Right before multiprocess you'd switch between building with and without wallet. But with multiprocess you could just leave the wallet process running 100 percent of the time and forget about it (unless the PR was wallet related)?
<sipa>
The separation in binaries is orthogonal to source code organization. Most core code changes will result in needing to recompile the wallet code - whether that ends up in a different binary or not.
<michaelfolkson>
Ok, understood. So there isn't an obvious developer workflow use case for multiprocess? Of course there are obvious "user" use cases
<sipa>
The point of multiprocess is splitting things into multiple processes at runtime. That's it.
<michaelfolkson>
Ok thanks
<sipa>
The build process already only rebuilds things touched by modified code. If you don't change anything that affects the wallet, the wallet code already won't be recompiled.
<sipa>
E.g. if you just change validation.cpp, the wallet code will not be recompiled.
<sipa>
But many changes happen in headers that are included by wallet code, so those will result in recompilation. Again, independent of multiprocess.
nanotube has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
bomb-on has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bomb-on has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
bomb-on has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
adiabat has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
_andrewtoth_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest9754 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
___nick___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
andrewtoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bomb-on has quit [Quit: aллилѹіа!]
Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kexkey has quit [Quit: kexkey]
gnaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
arythmetic has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
arythmet_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
arythmetic has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
arythmet_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
littlesh has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
<jamesob>
Did we make a change recently that might affect whether a node considers itself to be in IBD? I'm running an assumeutxo test that has one local peer download headers from another at a low height using the `-maxtipage=9999... -minimumchainwork=0x00` hack, but the second node is now refusing to get headers from the first node because the first thinks
<jamesob>
it's still in IBD despite passing those flags
Talkless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
<_aj_>
jamesob: it won't exit IBD unless it sees a block that's <24h old?
<_aj_>
or is maxtipage what's new?
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
<_aj_>
jamesob: hmm, i didn't know -maxtipage was a thing; cool. did you give those params to the first node as well as the second? otherwise seems like it should work to me
sdfgsdfg has quit [Quit: ZzzZ]
luke-jr has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
luke-jr has quit [Client Quit]
luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
luke-jr has quit [Client Quit]
luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
luke-jr has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]