12016-10-26T00:47:47  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
  22016-10-26T00:50:26  *** roconnor has quit IRC
  32016-10-26T01:16:37  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  42016-10-26T01:16:45  *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52016-10-26T01:17:03  *** pindarhk has quit IRC
  62016-10-26T01:17:06  *** Ylbam_ has quit IRC
  72016-10-26T01:19:14  *** pindarhk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82016-10-26T01:19:23  *** d_t has quit IRC
  92016-10-26T01:21:29  *** alpalp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102016-10-26T01:22:14  *** roconnor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112016-10-26T01:23:33  *** Taek has quit IRC
 122016-10-26T01:25:27  *** Taek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132016-10-26T01:26:50  *** a_meteorite has quit IRC
 142016-10-26T01:28:45  *** nsh has quit IRC
 152016-10-26T01:42:06  *** nsh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162016-10-26T01:42:12  *** moli has quit IRC
 172016-10-26T01:55:57  *** roconnor has quit IRC
 182016-10-26T02:03:46  *** aj_ is now known as aj
 192016-10-26T02:23:04  *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 202016-10-26T02:23:22  *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 212016-10-26T02:24:06  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 222016-10-26T02:25:11  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232016-10-26T02:29:44  *** alpalp has quit IRC
 242016-10-26T02:50:05  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 252016-10-26T02:51:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 262016-10-26T03:20:52  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: are you sure we can get a corrupt db from kill? that would be a pretty serious bug..
 272016-10-26T03:21:37  <luke-jr> I mean, a non-trivial part of the *purpose* of a db engine is to prevent corruption
 282016-10-26T03:21:59  <luke-jr> I know we have had some issues with literal power failures, but it seems absurd for kill to corrupt things
 292016-10-26T03:24:23  <gmaxwell> we shouldn't be, it would be a serious bug.  During IBD unclean poweroffs will pretty reliable corrupt things because we skip syncing, but otherwise it shouldn't.
 302016-10-26T03:24:30  <BlueMatt> sipa: i think i got all your nits on #9014, though some of your comments (from 15 minutes ago) were on outdated code (how did you do that? I pushed many hours ago)
 312016-10-26T03:27:16  <sipa> BlueMatt: i was reviewing commit by commit
 322016-10-26T03:27:31  <BlueMatt> oh, you missed some SQUASHME commits :/
 332016-10-26T03:28:04  <sipa> no, i just wasn't looking at them at the time
 342016-10-26T03:28:27  <BlueMatt> sipa: when you get to a stopping point, i can just squash and force-push...jeremy was happy with where it was and i assume only you and jeremy have looked at it
 352016-10-26T03:28:43  <sipa> BlueMatt: i'm fine with you squashing now
 362016-10-26T03:28:47  <BlueMatt> ok
 372016-10-26T03:29:00  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: context https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9001 fwiw
 382016-10-26T03:29:46  <luke-jr> inclined to ask him if he can provide remote access for debugging, but not sure there's a need if jonasschnelli has a way to reproduce something similar already
 392016-10-26T03:30:21  <jeremyrubin> I'm happy! A+ BlueMatt!
 402016-10-26T03:32:32  <BlueMatt> ok, force-pushed
 412016-10-26T03:33:28  <BlueMatt> sipa: see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9014#discussion_r85034371
 422016-10-26T03:33:30  <BlueMatt> anyway, bedtime for me
 432016-10-26T03:35:47  *** roconnor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442016-10-26T03:37:20  *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
 452016-10-26T03:45:33  *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 462016-10-26T04:08:35  *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472016-10-26T04:10:58  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 482016-10-26T04:17:28  *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
 492016-10-26T05:26:47  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502016-10-26T05:29:09  *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
 512016-10-26T05:33:15  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
 522016-10-26T06:03:16  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532016-10-26T06:03:53  *** vakano has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542016-10-26T06:14:38  *** fengling has quit IRC
 552016-10-26T06:19:40  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 562016-10-26T06:21:20  *** baldur has quit IRC
 572016-10-26T06:26:33  *** vakano has quit IRC
 582016-10-26T06:31:05  *** VaKaNO has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592016-10-26T06:33:31  *** VaKaNO has quit IRC
 602016-10-26T06:33:58  *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 612016-10-26T06:34:40  *** VaKaNO has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622016-10-26T06:40:53  *** VaKaNO has quit IRC
 632016-10-26T06:41:06  <gmaxwell> interesting, slushpool just failed to take a pretty attractive CFPF transaction set that my node would have mined.
 642016-10-26T06:41:08  *** VaKaNO has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 652016-10-26T06:45:28  *** Ylbam_ has quit IRC
 662016-10-26T06:48:23  *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 672016-10-26T06:51:35  *** VaKaNO has quit IRC
 682016-10-26T06:52:24  *** VaKaNO has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692016-10-26T06:54:06  *** VaKaNO is now known as VaKaN0
 702016-10-26T06:55:08  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 712016-10-26T06:56:31  *** VaKaN0 has quit IRC
 722016-10-26T06:57:23  *** VaKaN0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732016-10-26T06:59:34  *** VaKaN0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742016-10-26T07:17:49  *** roconnor has quit IRC
 752016-10-26T07:20:00  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762016-10-26T07:24:36  <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: my tests showed my that sudden shutdowns (power off situation) will result in corrupt databases (=require for re-sync) during IBD
 772016-10-26T07:24:55  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: quite different from a kill
 782016-10-26T07:25:16  <jonasschnelli> kill is a flexible term. :)
 792016-10-26T07:25:27  <jonasschnelli> ./kill is more specific
 802016-10-26T07:26:30  *** [RIT] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 812016-10-26T07:26:54  <jonasschnelli> I ran into different corruptions on Linux/Debian 1) when running out of memory 2) random corruption on USB device, 3) on OSX when force shutdown a process (lldb), 4) Window 10 in VMWare sudden power off
 822016-10-26T07:26:55  *** [RIT] has quit IRC
 832016-10-26T07:27:11  <jonasschnelli> All during IBD
 842016-10-26T07:27:17  *** [RIT]Seccour has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852016-10-26T07:27:38  *** mkarrer_ has quit IRC
 862016-10-26T07:28:14  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 872016-10-26T07:38:45  *** kadoban has quit IRC
 882016-10-26T07:46:12  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 892016-10-26T07:47:11  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
 902016-10-26T07:47:17  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912016-10-26T07:47:46  *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922016-10-26T07:52:44  *** [RIT]Seccour has quit IRC
 932016-10-26T08:02:41  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 942016-10-26T08:03:06  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 952016-10-26T08:06:52  <GitHub193> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9bdf5269f886...54259370ae93
 962016-10-26T08:06:53  <GitHub193> bitcoin/master 339c4b6 Cory Fields: release: bump required osx version to 10.8. Credit jonasschnelli....
 972016-10-26T08:06:53  <GitHub193> bitcoin/master 5425937 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9015: release: bump required osx version to 10.8. (jonasschnelli)...
 982016-10-26T08:07:07  <GitHub90> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9015: release: bump required osx version to 10.8. (jonasschnelli) (master...osx-disable107) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9015
 992016-10-26T08:07:47  <GitHub60> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.13: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a32d7c23fc0eedebe3579edb5d488a4c63b67b70
1002016-10-26T08:07:48  <GitHub60> bitcoin/0.13 a32d7c2 Cory Fields: release: bump required osx version to 10.8. Credit jonasschnelli....
1012016-10-26T08:10:49  *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022016-10-26T08:16:31  <blur3d> Hey Core. Just a thank you message for your all your work. Keep doing what you guys are doing. Ignore the outside pressures, and keep bitcoin from becoming centeralised. All of the fear mongering ignores the simple fact that the bitcoin network would be near impossible to replicate from scratch. Any transitional periods may have some discomfort, but compromising the network for short term bandaides is for fools.
1032016-10-26T08:18:00  *** ChillazZ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042016-10-26T08:20:47  <rabidus_> i'll sign that message also.
1052016-10-26T08:28:29  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062016-10-26T08:38:13  *** d_t has quit IRC
1072016-10-26T08:45:00  <midnightmagic> are there any plans to stuff some detached sigs into the repo for v0.13.1rc3..?
1082016-10-26T08:47:19  *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092016-10-26T08:49:53  *** harrymm has quit IRC
1102016-10-26T08:56:55  *** timothy has quit IRC
1112016-10-26T08:57:12  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122016-10-26T09:02:24  <btcdrak> blur3d: thank you for saying.
1132016-10-26T09:02:51  <btcdrak> midnightmagic: there are no plans for a binary for 0.13.1rc3
1142016-10-26T09:03:07  <btcdrak> so there is no point building gitian sigs for rc3
1152016-10-26T09:04:08  <gmaxwell> some people build sigs for rc3 to allow comparison, etc.
1162016-10-26T09:04:26  <gmaxwell> I hope in the future we manage to make it so unmodified rc->final doesn't change the gitian sigs.
1172016-10-26T09:09:25  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182016-10-26T09:09:46  <jonasschnelli> I guess midnightmagic is refering to code-signature detatched sigs (OSX/WIN) these would only be required if there would be binary releases (which we won't do for rc3 IMO)
1192016-10-26T09:10:54  <luke-jr> not sure why rc3 was even tagged :p
1202016-10-26T09:15:59  <gmaxwell> Causes more people to test.
1212016-10-26T09:16:05  <gmaxwell> and update their tests.
1222016-10-26T09:16:19  <timothy> gmaxwell: how? you still have to change the version
1232016-10-26T09:16:52  <gmaxwell> timothy: the version in the software is already 0.13.1. There is only some build automation that inserts the git-tag.
1242016-10-26T09:17:06  <timothy> oh ok
1252016-10-26T09:17:20  <timothy> I tough you still have rc3 in version name
1262016-10-26T09:17:23  <gmaxwell> timothy: but for tagged builds (e.g. releases) we could display the hash of the binary instead of setting the tag, or some hash of the source instead.
1272016-10-26T09:17:38  <gmaxwell> and then the binary would really be identical.
1282016-10-26T09:17:51  <gmaxwell> timothy: we try to change nothing. even really changing the tag implies some small risk.
1292016-10-26T09:18:11  <timothy> I agree :)
1302016-10-26T09:18:37  <wumpus> blur3d: thank you
1312016-10-26T09:18:45  <gmaxwell> (as there are processor design flaws that are alignment sensitive; a different string size could change offsets in the build, and mean that a release could be produced which consistenty crashed on a small set of hardware that tested fine with the rc)
1322016-10-26T09:20:01  <gmaxwell> firefox bug tracker is full of nightmare fuel: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1281759
1332016-10-26T09:20:35  <gmaxwell> "This adds some 4-byte NOPs to this IC stub on x86 if CPU family is 20 and model is 0-2. According to AMD engineers, limiting the number of branches per cache line might help, so I'm hopeful this will work."
1342016-10-26T09:20:51  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if we have such issues, I suspect we have bigger problems than changing the version number? :p
1352016-10-26T09:21:36  <wumpus> gmaxwell: that sounds like GPU compiler design :)
1362016-10-26T09:21:48  <wumpus> it doesn't work? add moar nops
1372016-10-26T09:22:26  <gmaxwell> there are a bunch of these -- amd seems to be especially guilty.  branch predictor bugs where under particular sets of instructions it'll just ignore a jmp.
1382016-10-26T09:22:51  <luke-jr> :|
1392016-10-26T09:23:06  <gmaxwell> and then mozilla puts out a new update that does nothing but change the PGO weights around a bit and then the crashes go away.
1402016-10-26T09:23:16  <wumpus> oh yes I'm sure the abuse of branch prediction caches to subvert ASLR (locally) is just the beginning, if people are really going to look into those bugs deeply I'm sure some are exploitable
1412016-10-26T09:23:45  <gmaxwell> then another update to change someting insignificant... and all those hosts are crashing again.
1422016-10-26T09:24:10  <wumpus> (e.g. make it skip the jmp that rejects the authentication)
1432016-10-26T09:27:23  <gmaxwell> hmmm
1442016-10-26T09:27:57  <luke-jr> wumpus: would you entertain support for TQt btw? or is that something I'd need to maintain out of tree?
1452016-10-26T09:28:04  <gmaxwell> Se, Greg ate d witness.
1462016-10-26T09:28:32  <gmaxwell> I never knew I named that after myself.
1472016-10-26T09:28:38  <timothy> gmaxwell: is arm better? :P
1482016-10-26T09:28:54  <wumpus> luke-jr: TQT?
1492016-10-26T09:29:02  <luke-jr> wumpus: Qt3 fork
1502016-10-26T09:29:15  <wumpus> timothy: unfortunately, no, though the specific bugs are different
1512016-10-26T09:29:27  <wumpus> (except for rowhammer, everyone loves rowhammer)
1522016-10-26T09:29:33  <luke-jr> with stuff like thread support, and maintained by TDE
1532016-10-26T09:29:58  <wumpus> luke-jr: why would you fork qt3? that seems ancient
1542016-10-26T09:30:00  <gmaxwell> timothy: no. beyond actual silicon flaws it's hard to find ANY arm board that can handle being run full out without becoming unstable. None of the boards are built for actual usage.
1552016-10-26T09:30:28  <luke-jr> wumpus: originally, because KDE 4 went downhill, and they wanted to maintain KDE 3
1562016-10-26T09:30:39  <gmaxwell> Most reliable I've used has been the novena, though without a active fan on it, the libsecp256k1 tests will still make it hit a thermal emergency cutoff.
1572016-10-26T09:30:57  *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582016-10-26T09:31:15  <timothy> I tried to have a full node on a banana pi. it crashes often :P
1592016-10-26T09:31:23  <wumpus> I've good experiences with cubox-i's, seems they got the cooling right
1602016-10-26T09:32:04  <wumpus> imx6 is also supported in mainline linux + the graphics drivers were partially written by me :)
1612016-10-26T09:32:29  <wumpus> 32 bit, though
1622016-10-26T09:32:38  <gmaxwell> imx family ends up in a lot of industrial control stuff too, probably less likely than armcores that are only used in smartphones to be buggy.
1632016-10-26T09:33:38  <wumpus> yes, even in planes, you'd hope they take stabilty seriously :)
1642016-10-26T09:34:30  <luke-jr> I'd kinda hope the planes don't rely on standard CPU stability
1652016-10-26T09:35:59  <wumpus> not only, for any vehicle control system, there's always fallbacks
1662016-10-26T09:36:19  <tulip> luke-jr: there's documentation about plane control out there, they seem to be nominally dual or triple redundant, even going so far as to have quorum between multiple devices. you can commonly get CPUs designed for doing medical control now which do lock stepped ARM cores and a comparator between them.
1672016-10-26T09:36:41  <luke-jr> tulip: yeah, those would be the *non-*standard CPUs :p
1682016-10-26T09:37:50  <wumpus> I'm more worried about cars in that regard
1692016-10-26T09:38:41  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: lockstep cpus are a basically off the shelf part now,  ti hercules, for example. It's inexpensive too, though not very fast.
1702016-10-26T09:39:59  *** fengling has quit IRC
1712016-10-26T09:40:03  <rabidus_> e
1722016-10-26T09:42:16  <wumpus> luke-jr: but re: qt3, I think it would be a shame to introduce that just now that everything is converging on qt5
1732016-10-26T09:42:18  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742016-10-26T09:42:44  <luke-jr> Talos ships with TDE? :P
1752016-10-26T09:43:11  <luke-jr> but yeah, I kindof agree
1762016-10-26T09:43:37  * luke-jr kicks his IRC client that takes a full second to change channel tabs since compiling it against Qt5
1772016-10-26T09:45:33  <wumpus> and ideally, focusing on a single version means that less effort has to go into compatiblity and more can to improving the experience for users
1782016-10-26T09:52:58  <wumpus> why does Talos ship with TDE?
1792016-10-26T09:53:15  <luke-jr> common lead guy
1802016-10-26T09:54:46  <wumpus> right
1812016-10-26T09:57:27  <luke-jr> ☺
1822016-10-26T09:58:28  *** a_meteorite has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832016-10-26T10:03:04  <GitHub119> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #9020: rpc: Remove invalid explanation from wallet fee message (master...2016_10_wallet_message) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9020
1842016-10-26T10:05:15  <wumpus> instagibbs: re: #9016 are you sure that problem will always be logged to the debug log when a transaction coming through RPC is rejected? If not, pointing the user to debug.log could result in a wild goose chase
1852016-10-26T10:05:53  <wumpus> we did make the transaction validation a lot less noisy in recent versions
1862016-10-26T10:06:22  <GitHub64> [bitcoin] gzuser01 opened pull request #9021: zetacoin 0.13 (master...gzuser01-patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9021
1872016-10-26T10:06:35  <gmaxwell> time to close? ^
1882016-10-26T10:06:36  <gmaxwell> 5
1892016-10-26T10:06:38  <gmaxwell> 4
1902016-10-26T10:06:39  <gmaxwell> 3
1912016-10-26T10:06:41  <gmaxwell> 2
1922016-10-26T10:06:44  <gmaxwell> 1
1932016-10-26T10:06:46  <wumpus> the bot is slow
1942016-10-26T10:06:47  <GitHub60> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9021: zetacoin 0.13 (master...gzuser01-patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9021
1952016-10-26T10:06:56  <gmaxwell> close enough.
1962016-10-26T10:07:47  <GitHub197> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #9022: Update release notes to mention dropping OS X 10.7 support (0.13...0-13-1-osx-notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9022
1972016-10-26T10:45:10  <gmaxwell> so interesting, last block (by bitclub network) had 866 transactions,  prior blocks (all same max size)-- 1942, 1422, 2215, 2145, 1905..  I wonder why bitclub's transactions were so much larger?
1982016-10-26T10:45:43  <gmaxwell> they also collect a lot more fees.
1992016-10-26T10:48:40  <gmaxwell> 1.239 BTC vs, .513 .839 .723 .689
2002016-10-26T10:51:46  <gmaxwell> I see it earlier too. antpool mined a block with .714 btc in fees in 2288 transactions, then bitclub with 1783 transactions but .950 btc in fees.
2012016-10-26T10:51:51  <wumpus> interesting, a custom strategy to maximize fees?
2022016-10-26T10:52:17  *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
2032016-10-26T10:53:09  <gmaxwell> well I know that earlier both slush and antpool failed to mine a fairly attractive CPFP (where the parent had ample fees for relay).. the bitclub picked it up.
2042016-10-26T10:53:19  <gmaxwell> so it ~might~ be 0.13 vs not.
2052016-10-26T11:01:14  <gmaxwell> right now my GBT returns 1.03 btc in fees for a 1MB block.
2062016-10-26T11:01:50  <gmaxwell> hm. if it weren't 4am I'd hack update tip to do a gbt and log the total fee amount from the result before processing a block.
2072016-10-26T11:03:34  <gmaxwell> in any case if 435976 has less than 1.06 btc in fees, something is up.
2082016-10-26T11:11:09  <GitHub58> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #9023: Add logging to bitcoin-util-test.py (master...btutiltestlogging) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9023
2092016-10-26T11:11:46  <gmaxwell> logging now,
2102016-10-26T11:11:47  <gmaxwell> Wed Oct 26 11:10:29 UTC 2016 435975 109856937
2112016-10-26T11:11:58  <gmaxwell> 1477480260 435976 99407716
2122016-10-26T11:12:45  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132016-10-26T11:14:46  <gmaxwell> so 435976 could hav collected 1.09 by my observation, collected 0.953 instead (not that much worse), and immediately after it the next block could connect 0.994 ... pretty good.
2142016-10-26T11:14:54  <gmaxwell> Take that mining is unstable people. :P
2152016-10-26T11:15:16  <gmaxwell> also bc.i is like seriously behind.
2162016-10-26T11:15:19  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172016-10-26T11:15:20  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182016-10-26T11:15:48  <gmaxwell> oops I was looking at 435975 there.
2192016-10-26T11:17:21  <gmaxwell> also wtf, getblock needs a "true" for its verbose argument, while getrawtransaction needs a "1".
2202016-10-26T11:17:42  <gmaxwell> okay 435976 took 1.003 which is pretty close to what I saw right before.
2212016-10-26T11:20:42  <GitHub9> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/54259370ae93...86f9e3dbba41
2222016-10-26T11:20:42  <GitHub9> bitcoin/master 04c1c15 Wladimir J. van der Laan: rpc: Remove invalid explanation from wallet fee message
2232016-10-26T11:20:43  <GitHub9> bitcoin/master 86f9e3d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9020: rpc: Remove invalid explanation from wallet fee message...
2242016-10-26T11:20:57  <GitHub162> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9020: rpc: Remove invalid explanation from wallet fee message (master...2016_10_wallet_message) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9020
2252016-10-26T11:24:47  <wumpus> that's slightly curious, maybe getrawtransaction author expected an 'even more verbose' format at some point and pass '2'? it'd have made sense for `getblock` and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8704
2262016-10-26T11:25:35  <wumpus> getblock \"hash\" ( verbose ) ( extraVerbose )  is a bit silly as APIs go
2272016-10-26T11:25:44  <wumpus> but it'd better have been called verbosityLevel then
2282016-10-26T11:26:52  <luke-jr> IIRC originally there was a bunch of flags on an Object controlling verbosity
2292016-10-26T11:27:11  <wumpus> really? seems like a reversion then
2302016-10-26T11:27:55  <wumpus> in any case the RPC could be trivially changed to accept 'true' for '1' too
2312016-10-26T11:28:05  *** sturles has quit IRC
2322016-10-26T11:28:18  <wumpus> (and false for 0)
2332016-10-26T11:28:22  <gmaxwell> yea, that might be reasonable.  I've notied this true/1 thing before and thought I was nuts. :)
2342016-10-26T11:28:25  <gmaxwell> 1477480364 435976 101621240
2352016-10-26T11:28:28  <gmaxwell> 1477481079 435976 108481648
2362016-10-26T11:28:30  <gmaxwell> 435977 takes 1.01339 btc in fees.
2372016-10-26T11:28:33  <gmaxwell> 1477481089 435977 94256908
2382016-10-26T11:29:41  <gmaxwell> so either miner at 435977 has 715 seconds of latency from gbt->mining, or their transaction selection is less optimal than 0.13.1 on my desktop with defaults + weight=4m.
2392016-10-26T11:29:41  *** blur3d has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2402016-10-26T11:31:02  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: or they're being paid out of band as most big pools seem to now
2412016-10-26T11:31:33  <gmaxwell> I looked, don't appear to have a wad of free transactions.
2422016-10-26T11:32:01  <luke-jr> hm
2432016-10-26T11:32:24  <gmaxwell> oh well I know why that miner's selection would be suboptimal.. 0.12.x code (they claim to run BU)
2442016-10-26T11:39:42  *** a_meteorite has quit IRC
2452016-10-26T11:40:22  <luke-jr> XD
2462016-10-26T11:40:46  *** a_meteorite has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472016-10-26T11:43:14  <wumpus> wasn't far of the mark with misconfigured/weird software hypothesis
2482016-10-26T11:45:39  *** face has quit IRC
2492016-10-26T11:51:06  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502016-10-26T11:52:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2512016-10-26T11:52:38  *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522016-10-26T11:55:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532016-10-26T12:05:27  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542016-10-26T12:10:02  *** d_t has quit IRC
2552016-10-26T12:11:47  <GitHub151> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #9025: getrawtransaction should take a bool for verbose (master...getrawtransbool) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9025
2562016-10-26T12:14:49  *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
2572016-10-26T12:23:06  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582016-10-26T12:36:42  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592016-10-26T12:45:38  *** jnewshoes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602016-10-26T12:54:05  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
2612016-10-26T13:10:04  *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2622016-10-26T13:16:03  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2632016-10-26T13:32:24  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642016-10-26T13:33:43  *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652016-10-26T13:36:11  *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
2662016-10-26T13:46:02  *** fengling has quit IRC
2672016-10-26T13:54:31  *** a_meteorite has quit IRC
2682016-10-26T13:55:18  *** a_meteorite has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692016-10-26T13:59:38  <adiabat> Hi, I have an admittedly nit-picky request for the rpc calls
2702016-10-26T13:59:52  <adiabat> could we put "weight" in the getrawtransaction return?
2712016-10-26T14:00:40  <adiabat> right now getrawtransaction returns "size" and "vsize", while getblock returns "strippedsize", "size", and "weight"
2722016-10-26T14:06:15  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732016-10-26T14:06:39  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742016-10-26T14:09:02  <adiabat> the "true" vs "1" sillyness in rpc calls just reminded me.  If you want the "weight" of a transaction you have to calculate it from size and vsize.
2752016-10-26T14:11:26  <adiabat> also I may be missing something but I don't think verbosity does anything to the getblock command
2762016-10-26T14:11:33  <jonasschnelli> adiabat: This would be easy to implement... maybe give it a try?!
2772016-10-26T14:11:38  <jonasschnelli> Or open an issue on github
2782016-10-26T14:11:48  <jonasschnelli> You need to add a call to GetTransactionWeight()
2792016-10-26T14:12:06  <jonasschnelli> somewhere near entry.push_back(Pair("vsize", (int)::GetVirtualTransactionSize(tx)));
2802016-10-26T14:12:16  <adiabat> ok, sure
2812016-10-26T14:13:58  *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
2822016-10-26T14:16:43  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2832016-10-26T14:25:45  *** da2ce7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842016-10-26T14:34:47  *** a_meteorite has quit IRC
2852016-10-26T14:34:57  *** a_meteor_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862016-10-26T14:48:17  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872016-10-26T14:50:41  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2882016-10-26T14:54:02  *** cdecker has quit IRC
2892016-10-26T14:54:32  *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902016-10-26T14:54:43  *** BashCo has quit IRC
2912016-10-26T14:55:22  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2922016-10-26T15:00:08  *** BashCo has quit IRC
2932016-10-26T15:14:13  *** Magma has quit IRC
2942016-10-26T15:14:29  *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952016-10-26T15:21:06  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962016-10-26T15:26:31  *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972016-10-26T15:30:43  <sipa> adiabat: originally i wanted weight to be purely an internal thing, and have vsize be the exposed value
2982016-10-26T15:38:24  *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
2992016-10-26T15:38:35  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002016-10-26T15:48:23  *** RoyceX has quit IRC
3012016-10-26T15:51:48  *** n1ce has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022016-10-26T16:00:42  <adiabat> sipa: Hmm ok, should we put vsize in the block info instead?
3032016-10-26T16:01:37  <sipa> adiabat: nah, weight is better in any case
3042016-10-26T16:02:00  <sipa> i'm just mentioning it to explain why weight isn't in gettransaction
3052016-10-26T16:02:41  <adiabat> OK I'll look at putting weight in the getrawtransaction return data
3062016-10-26T16:03:07  <adiabat> also the 'verbosity' on getblock, not sure what that does... if it does nothing, maybe can get rid of it
3072016-10-26T16:03:13  *** da2ce7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3082016-10-26T16:03:39  <sipa> it is about returning 1) just txids 2) full tx info 3) full tx data
3092016-10-26T16:14:39  <btcdrak> wumpus: I have found a bug in univalue JSON export, where do I submit the patch?
3102016-10-26T16:17:32  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112016-10-26T16:27:29  <jtimon> quick question on the blocksigning stuff, what flags should I use for block signing (ie #define BLOCK_SIGN_SCRIPT_FLAGS (SCRIPT_VERIFY_P2SH|SCRIPT_VERIFY_WITNESS) is what I have for now)
3122016-10-26T16:28:09  <jtimon> some obviously don't make sense like cltv and csv
3132016-10-26T16:29:21  <jtimon> for others like SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALIF or SCRIPT_VERIFY_NULLFAIL feels like why not?
3142016-10-26T16:30:07  *** tulip has quit IRC
3152016-10-26T16:32:04  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162016-10-26T16:32:04  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3172016-10-26T16:37:25  *** owowo has quit IRC
3182016-10-26T16:41:04  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192016-10-26T16:41:18  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
3202016-10-26T16:42:21  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3212016-10-26T16:42:22  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3222016-10-26T16:42:26  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3232016-10-26T16:50:11  <wumpus> btcdrak: upstream to jgarzik/univalue, and we can merge it to bitcoin-core/univalue if that takes too long / is urgent
3242016-10-26T16:52:37  *** a_meteor_ has quit IRC
3252016-10-26T17:17:01  <jtimon> what's the opposite operation of ParseHex() ?
3262016-10-26T17:19:06  <sipa> HexStr
3272016-10-26T17:19:07  <Chris_Stewart_5> HexStr?
3282016-10-26T17:20:16  <jtimon> thanks!
3292016-10-26T17:21:09  <jtimon> they were on the same file *hides*
3302016-10-26T17:25:20  <sipa> hiding in plain sight, as they say
3312016-10-26T17:25:40  *** atroxes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3322016-10-26T17:27:35  *** ville-- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332016-10-26T17:29:22  *** a_meteorite has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342016-10-26T17:30:59  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
3352016-10-26T17:31:47  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3362016-10-26T17:39:17  <btcdrak> wumpus: well it isnt urgent. Problem is it will need to be merged into Core along at the same time as a tweak of some test cases in the test/data/*.json files.
3372016-10-26T17:50:41  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3382016-10-26T18:18:13  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3392016-10-26T18:21:30  *** atroxes has quit IRC
3402016-10-26T18:30:32  *** murch has quit IRC
3412016-10-26T18:30:37  *** atroxes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3422016-10-26T18:31:13  <GitHub114> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #9026: Fix handling of invalid compact blocks (master...fix-invalidcb-handling) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9026
3432016-10-26T18:41:13  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442016-10-26T18:47:13  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3452016-10-26T18:49:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3462016-10-26T18:56:20  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3472016-10-26T18:56:49  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
3482016-10-26T19:01:30  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492016-10-26T19:14:24  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3502016-10-26T19:20:06  *** jl2012 has quit IRC
3512016-10-26T19:20:57  *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3522016-10-26T19:21:45  *** Ylbam_ has quit IRC
3532016-10-26T19:24:41  *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3542016-10-26T19:29:30  <btcdrak> Please review: "Add segwit upgrade guide" https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/240
3552016-10-26T19:48:37  <michagogo> btcdrak: there seem to be a few things that look like they should be links that are missing the links
3562016-10-26T19:48:48  <michagogo> Things like [some text][]
3572016-10-26T19:49:17  <michagogo> Is that intentional?
3582016-10-26T19:49:27  <michagogo> I don't know enough about markdown
3592016-10-26T19:53:48  <btcdrak> michagogo: they are in the references.md include near the top
3602016-10-26T19:56:09  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
3612016-10-26T19:56:58  <michagogo> btcdrak: I see that for the BIPs
3622016-10-26T19:57:13  <michagogo> But it looks like there are two missing
3632016-10-26T19:57:18  <michagogo> Or, wait a sec
3642016-10-26T19:57:24  <btcdrak> well please comment on the PR
3652016-10-26T19:57:50  <michagogo> No, I found them
3662016-10-26T19:58:23  <michagogo> Like I said, I'm not really familiar with advanced markdown and didn't want to make a stupid comment :P
3672016-10-26T19:58:59  <michagogo> So if there's a reference, you can do [text][] if you want the link text to match the reference?
3682016-10-26T19:59:15  <michagogo> [text1][text2] is just if it differs?
3692016-10-26T20:00:27  <btcdrak> yes
3702016-10-26T20:01:25  <michagogo> I see.
3712016-10-26T20:04:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
3722016-10-26T20:05:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3732016-10-26T20:29:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3742016-10-26T20:31:43  *** jannes has quit IRC
3752016-10-26T20:43:28  *** To7 has quit IRC
3762016-10-26T20:45:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3772016-10-26T20:53:16  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3782016-10-26T20:54:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3792016-10-26T20:55:37  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
3802016-10-26T20:57:50  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3812016-10-26T21:14:20  *** nibor has quit IRC
3822016-10-26T21:16:15  *** To7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832016-10-26T21:27:01  *** murch has quit IRC
3842016-10-26T21:27:39  <gmaxwell> uh revealing errors.
3852016-10-26T21:27:54  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: https://btc.com/000000000000000002eb076392586c5b034ba3826ff6adb459bc57db4191943e  reveals that eligius is just hardcoing versions in a dangerous way.
3862016-10-26T21:34:22  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872016-10-26T21:37:14  *** echonaut has quit IRC
3882016-10-26T21:37:26  *** echonaut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3892016-10-26T21:44:58  <gmaxwell> Anyone feel like extracting the amount of fees per block recently?  Here is what the node on my desktop would have made blocks for: http://0bin.net/paste/y4kPmRYLiiuN5gTN#kpX3urA92l6Ggly0MgcThd9VHzNSKP7WZw6ce6bq5rI
3902016-10-26T21:45:49  <btcdrak> I extracted this today
3912016-10-26T21:45:51  <btcdrak> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JlV5_3q251V7wJM87MH89kT_j8A26b7qM-ThYn2p65g/edit#gid=0
3922016-10-26T21:49:18  <morcos> gmaxwell: i actually have a long running node that has been calculating that but only considering txs it actually saw in its mempool.   got to run now.. but can get you the results form that later
3932016-10-26T21:49:27  <morcos> don't think its that different, thank goodness
3942016-10-26T21:54:30  <gmaxwell> btcdrak: can you merge in my data where it overlaps and show the difference?
3952016-10-26T21:59:55  <btcdrak> gmaxwell: done
3962016-10-26T22:00:25  *** cdecker has quit IRC
3972016-10-26T22:12:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3982016-10-26T22:13:35  *** d_t_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3992016-10-26T22:16:22  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002016-10-26T22:16:56  *** d_t has quit IRC
4012016-10-26T22:17:55  *** JackH has quit IRC
4022016-10-26T22:21:50  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
4032016-10-26T22:22:48  *** Guyver2__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4042016-10-26T22:27:04  *** Guyver2__ has quit IRC
4052016-10-26T22:27:04  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
4062016-10-26T22:31:59  *** a_meteorite has quit IRC
4072016-10-26T22:34:07  *** harding_ is now known as harding
4082016-10-26T22:52:43  <phantomcircuit> btcdrak: the average transaction sizes are really high
4092016-10-26T22:59:22  *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4102016-10-26T23:00:19  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4112016-10-26T23:07:13  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4122016-10-26T23:09:40  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
4132016-10-26T23:10:29  *** cdecker has quit IRC
4142016-10-26T23:11:04  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4152016-10-26T23:11:21  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4162016-10-26T23:15:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4172016-10-26T23:34:58  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4182016-10-26T23:38:37  *** d_t_ has quit IRC
4192016-10-26T23:53:47  <gmaxwell> wow, gbminers block 436404 failed to collect .246 btc in fees.
4202016-10-26T23:55:16  <gmaxwell> bitclub is the only miner that beat my node in these observations
4212016-10-26T23:55:25  <gmaxwell> and only slightly
4222016-10-26T23:58:59  *** a_meteorite has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232016-10-26T23:59:34  <gmaxwell> average amount of missed fees by 'block source':
4242016-10-26T23:59:36  <gmaxwell> BitClub -0.00241024
4252016-10-26T23:59:37  <gmaxwell> BitFury 0.0182999
4262016-10-26T23:59:37  <gmaxwell> BTC.com 0.0286225
4272016-10-26T23:59:37  <gmaxwell> HaoBTC 0.0291582
4282016-10-26T23:59:39  <gmaxwell> SlushPool 0.0402993
4292016-10-26T23:59:41  <gmaxwell> BTCC 0.0504893
4302016-10-26T23:59:44  <gmaxwell> AntPool 0.0606765
4312016-10-26T23:59:46  <gmaxwell> F2Pool 0.080212
4322016-10-26T23:59:49  <gmaxwell> ViaBTC 0.0886112
4332016-10-26T23:59:51  <gmaxwell> Bitcoin.com 0.106677
4342016-10-26T23:59:54  <gmaxwell> BW.COM 0.125634
4352016-10-26T23:59:56  <gmaxwell> Unknown 0.166871
4362016-10-26T23:59:59  <gmaxwell> GBMiners 0.246336