stevenwy37 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
stevenwy37 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
PaperSword has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest6 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
gundam964 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest6 has quit [Client Quit]
<josie>
fyi - https://bitcoincore.org/en/meetings/ still has the cal invites for the old meeting time. not sure how much people use that, but prob nice to have an updated cal invite. I can create a calendar and open a PR to change it, unless someone already has a good public calendar we can use
<josie>
could also just remove the cal invite and put the actual meeting time on the page
bitdex has quit [Quit: = ""]
gundam964 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
martinus has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
martinus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
earnestly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
stevenwy37 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
stevenwy37 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<achow101>
Huh, I thought it was updated?
<achow101>
Maybe it's just the gcal?
<achow101>
Oh, maybe updating it changed the link
preimage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<josie>
achow101: I just updated the devwiki (altho it still has the outdated gcal link), not sure where else we have it listed
<achow101>
We can probably drop the gcal link, the ics invite should be pretty easy to re-generate
<jamesob>
I'm ironing out some weirdness with pruning - during snapshot use, that branch doesn't prune as aggressively as it should, but I'm hoping to have that resolved in the next few days
<jamesob>
in any case, it's definitely ready for testing so if you're feeling the urge to load "production" snapshots, go nuts
<glozow>
The PR to review right now is #27609. It fixes an issue sdaftuar found, and allows submitpackage on mainnet (which I've been told may be helpful given current conditions).
<jamesob>
josie: if the respective PR descriptions do not make the distinction between those branches clear, let me know (sorry for interrupting pkgrelay)
<sipa_>
So, we're currently in a libsecp256k1 sprint this week, which resulted already in some changes to the ellswift PR there
<sipa_>
Next week I'll update the PR in core to update for that.
<instagibbs>
nice
<sipa_>
And also open a tracking issue, as I want to think a bit about how to structure future PRs.
<achow101>
great, looking forward to it
<jamesob>
sipa_: anything we can run in the wild right now to test?
<sipa_>
So the current thing to look at is 1129, it's not mergable in current condition (because it depends on secp changes), and slightly outdated, but the Core code won't change much.
<sipa_>
jamesob: nothing to play around with right, sorry.
<sipa_>
*right now
<jamesob>
no prob; no shortage of prospective changes to run :)
<jamesob>
fee market has made sure of that
<sipa_>
haha
b_101 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<achow101>
#topic High priority for review
<core-meetingbot>
topic: High priority for review
<sipa_>
errr, i mean, the next thing to look at is #27479
<glozow>
achow101: last time you were going to mention "cancel wallet meeting" and we didn't get to it?
<fanquake>
Good high prio updates too
<jamesob>
instagibbs: will be deploying that to bmon shortly
<achow101>
instagibbs: added
<instagibbs>
reviving an old PR because I've seen some ummmmm, "persistent" peers that actually never hand us a full block
<achow101>
glozow: oh yeah
<josie>
+1 regarding project updates, really helpful to know what to focus on and really appreciate the project "leads" showing up for the meeting
<instagibbs>
and these peers seem to connect to a LOT of listening nodes
<instagibbs>
jamesob cheers
<instagibbs>
If you look in your logs you may see "Timeout"s
<instagibbs>
let me know if you do
<achow101>
since we have time, I have a wallet meeting topic, and I forgot to run last week's wallet meeting
<jonatack>
instagibbs: been seeing timeouts indeed
<instagibbs>
We can DM about it :)
<achow101>
#topic Cancel wallet meeting
<core-meetingbot>
topic: Cancel wallet meeting
<instagibbs>
fin
<brunoerg>
Is there a specific channel for wallet stuff?
<jonatack>
brunoerg: i don't believe so
<instagibbs>
i think this channel is fine
<jonatack>
only for builds and the gui
<achow101>
I think it's probably time to sunset the wallet meeting. there's been less focus on wallet things and we could probably bring wallet related topics back to the general meeting when they come up
<jonatack>
(and signet)
<provoostenator>
achow101: sounds good. I was thinking the new time slot could help with (my poor) attendance, but we seem to have plenty of room in the regular meeting anyway.
<achow101>
we can re-evaluate if there isn't space in the general meeting to discuss wallet (or other specific subsystem) topics
<sipa_>
sgtm to cancel it for now
<josie>
+1, one meeting per week seems like enough
<achow101>
ok, unless someone raises an objection between now and next friday, I think we can consider it canceled for now
<glozow>
sgtm. I'm in favor of wallet topics being discussed in the general meeting
<achow101>
Any other topics?
<furszy>
would be nice to have a wallet's PRs queue. Even when we aren't chatting much publicly about it, there is lot of stuff going on there.
<fanquake>
sounds like if anyone raises objections they are nominating themselves to run it in any case
<furszy>
and well, I'm a bit tired of reviewing 24914 over and over.
<provoostenator>
Is there any reason the chainstate ldb files are only 2 MB each?
<fanquake>
* [new tag] v24.1rc3 -> v24.1rc3
<provoostenator>
(oh I'm guessing because they need to be randomly updated)
<_aj_>
provoostenator: (oh)
<provoostenator>
The reason I wondered is because after an IBD with very large -dbcache it took my 2019 MBP almost half an hour to store them. Meanwhile the shutdown log says nothing and I might have forced quit it if I didn't notice the new files getting added.
pablomartin has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<provoostenator>
(using v25.0rc1)
pablomartin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
pablomartin has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
pablomartin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Tanner_LCC has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Tanner_LCC has quit [Client Quit]
<vasild>
sr_gi[m]: yo, wrt #27602, I think in master we would not reply to GETDATA for transactions that entered the mempool after the MEMPOOL request
<gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27602 | net processing: avoid serving non-announced txs as a result of a MEMPOOL message by sr-gi · Pull Request #27602 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<vasild>
except if it happens in the same second, e.g. mempool request at 1683821264.2 and a new tx arrives at 1683821264.7, in this case the tx entered the pool after the mempool request but both times will be rounded up to a second so both will equal 1683821264 and thus txinfo.m_time <= mempool_req would allow the reply to getdata
<vasild>
s/rounded up/truncated/
<_aj_>
vasild: we'd start replying exactly 2mins after it had entered though?
<vasild>
yes, I guess
b_101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ZeroMaster has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<fanquake>
All changes for a 23.2rc1 should now be in #27624. So that's open for review
<jamesob>
There's something funky going on with logging. I'm not seeing `LogPrint(BCLog::BLOCKSTORE, ...)` messages appear even when running with `-debug=blockstore`.
Talkless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
___nick___ has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<achow101>
jamesob: are you sure those lines are reached?
vysn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<jamesob>
achow101: yeah; I changed them to LogPrintf and they started printing
<jamesob>
will verify...
<achow101>
ah, the category is apparently blockstorage, not blockstore
<achow101>
even though it's BCLog::BLOCKSTORE
<jamesob>
achow101: good spot!
<jonatack>
achow101: i've been wanting to align those two for a good while now but doubted anyone would agree to making the change :p
<jamesob>
we should at least error if someone passes a faulty -debug=x option
<jonatack>
we do
<jonatack>
well, we warn
kevkevin has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
realies has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<jb55>
achow101: haven't seen it since. maybe if there was a way I could simulate the same mempool state as that crazy day.