12017-01-21T00:04:45 *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22017-01-21T00:07:51 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9452: Use TravisCI to enforce copyright header rules for source files (master...PR-travisci-copyright-enforce) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9452
32017-01-21T00:24:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #8587: Provide bloom services to whitelisted nodes. (master...WhitelistedBloom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8587
42017-01-21T00:27:39 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9451: CScript: remove redundant bounds check (master...remove_extra_bounds_check) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9451
52017-01-21T00:58:31 *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62017-01-21T01:03:05 *** xinxi has quit IRC
72017-01-21T01:06:48 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9315: Request announcement by cmpctblock AFTER requesting cmpctblock/blocktxn (master...RequestAnnounceAfter) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9315
82017-01-21T01:12:30 *** Netmage has quit IRC
92017-01-21T01:13:36 *** Netmage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102017-01-21T01:24:24 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112017-01-21T01:26:01 *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
122017-01-21T01:30:21 *** handlex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132017-01-21T01:33:05 *** handlex has quit IRC
142017-01-21T01:50:13 *** abpa has quit IRC
152017-01-21T02:31:18 *** waxwing__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162017-01-21T02:31:44 *** waxwing has quit IRC
172017-01-21T02:31:50 *** waxwing__ is now known as waxwing
182017-01-21T02:37:45 *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192017-01-21T02:47:15 *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202017-01-21T02:49:44 *** abpa has quit IRC
212017-01-21T03:04:41 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
222017-01-21T03:07:29 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
232017-01-21T03:10:19 *** windsok has quit IRC
242017-01-21T03:30:39 *** xinxi has quit IRC
252017-01-21T03:44:49 *** chjj has quit IRC
262017-01-21T03:47:19 *** windsok has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272017-01-21T03:49:34 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282017-01-21T03:52:31 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
292017-01-21T04:07:53 *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302017-01-21T04:08:44 *** chris200_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312017-01-21T04:11:19 *** chris2000 has quit IRC
322017-01-21T04:14:35 *** windsok has quit IRC
332017-01-21T04:21:48 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342017-01-21T04:22:52 *** wofiis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352017-01-21T04:50:04 *** windsok has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362017-01-21T05:00:16 *** dermoth has quit IRC
372017-01-21T05:01:10 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382017-01-21T05:03:05 *** gluytium has quit IRC
392017-01-21T05:05:33 *** kadoban has quit IRC
402017-01-21T05:31:45 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
412017-01-21T05:33:50 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422017-01-21T05:34:54 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
432017-01-21T05:48:27 *** jannes has quit IRC
442017-01-21T05:51:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jtimon opened pull request #9608: WIP: split processmessages (master...2017-01-split-processmessages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9608
452017-01-21T06:06:07 *** Alopex has quit IRC
462017-01-21T06:07:12 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472017-01-21T06:28:02 *** Alopex has quit IRC
482017-01-21T06:29:07 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492017-01-21T06:41:39 *** cfields has quit IRC
502017-01-21T06:43:46 *** cfields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512017-01-21T06:54:38 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9609: net: fix remaining net assertions (fixes #9212) (master...net-version) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9609
522017-01-21T07:06:16 *** Alopex has quit IRC
532017-01-21T07:07:21 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542017-01-21T07:19:53 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552017-01-21T07:27:19 *** aalex has quit IRC
562017-01-21T07:28:35 *** Soligor has quit IRC
572017-01-21T07:33:34 *** cfields has quit IRC
582017-01-21T07:41:58 *** cfields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592017-01-21T07:56:24 *** xinxi has quit IRC
602017-01-21T07:58:39 *** moli_ has quit IRC
612017-01-21T08:06:22 *** moli_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622017-01-21T08:08:51 *** moli_ has quit IRC
632017-01-21T08:09:08 *** moli_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642017-01-21T08:16:01 *** wofiis has quit IRC
652017-01-21T08:22:49 *** cannon-c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662017-01-21T08:35:12 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672017-01-21T09:02:18 *** Netmage has quit IRC
682017-01-21T09:04:23 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
692017-01-21T09:06:43 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702017-01-21T09:30:23 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712017-01-21T09:42:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
722017-01-21T09:43:18 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732017-01-21T09:43:50 *** jtimon has quit IRC
742017-01-21T09:44:10 *** waxwing has quit IRC
752017-01-21T10:03:22 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
762017-01-21T10:40:29 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772017-01-21T10:53:24 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
782017-01-21T10:54:53 *** whphhg has quit IRC
792017-01-21T10:55:09 *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802017-01-21T10:55:35 *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812017-01-21T10:59:35 *** Soligor has quit IRC
822017-01-21T11:00:16 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832017-01-21T11:24:55 *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
842017-01-21T11:29:39 *** Soligor has quit IRC
852017-01-21T11:31:34 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
862017-01-21T11:33:36 *** str4d has quit IRC
872017-01-21T11:42:55 *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
882017-01-21T11:43:16 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892017-01-21T11:52:01 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902017-01-21T11:55:09 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
912017-01-21T11:59:36 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922017-01-21T12:08:15 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
932017-01-21T12:09:19 *** Netmage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942017-01-21T12:11:57 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
952017-01-21T12:14:37 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962017-01-21T12:48:23 *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
972017-01-21T12:59:42 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
982017-01-21T12:59:42 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992017-01-21T13:15:34 *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002017-01-21T13:15:34 *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-01-21T13:30:21 *** gluytium has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022017-01-21T13:30:48 *** BCBot_ has quit IRC
1032017-01-21T13:31:04 *** BCBot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042017-01-21T13:38:19 *** afk11 has quit IRC
1052017-01-21T13:45:14 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-01-21T14:07:57 *** cannon-c is now known as cannon-c_AFK
1072017-01-21T14:17:19 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082017-01-21T14:17:53 *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
1092017-01-21T14:53:15 *** Sosumi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102017-01-21T15:00:07 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112017-01-21T15:00:49 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1122017-01-21T15:31:42 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132017-01-21T15:38:30 *** waxwing has quit IRC
1142017-01-21T15:39:08 *** aalex has quit IRC
1152017-01-21T15:42:29 *** cdecker has quit IRC
1162017-01-21T15:42:47 *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172017-01-21T16:22:29 *** cdecker has quit IRC
1182017-01-21T16:29:02 *** Alopex has quit IRC
1192017-01-21T16:30:07 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202017-01-21T16:30:12 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212017-01-21T16:32:46 *** Soligor has quit IRC
1222017-01-21T16:33:32 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232017-01-21T16:33:36 *** _mn3monic has quit IRC
1242017-01-21T16:36:30 *** _mn3monic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-01-21T16:46:46 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
1262017-01-21T17:30:50 *** Soligor_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272017-01-21T17:33:59 *** Soligor has quit IRC
1282017-01-21T17:59:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1292017-01-21T18:00:07 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302017-01-21T18:02:01 *** Soligor_ is now known as Soligor
1312017-01-21T18:21:47 *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322017-01-21T18:29:25 <gmaxwell> should UpdatePreferredDownload be checking ffeeler?
1332017-01-21T18:36:38 <BlueMatt> probably?
1342017-01-21T18:37:43 <BlueMatt> I'm hugely concerned about current fee estimation algorithms - they have effectively put floors on what they will return, when things an order of magnitude or less fee will easily get confirmed :(
1352017-01-21T18:38:17 <gmaxwell> huh?
1362017-01-21T18:38:43 <BlueMatt> eg currently, because no one creates txn with things less than 50 sat/byte, no fee estimation will ever return anything less than that
1372017-01-21T18:39:08 <BlueMatt> but things with 10 often easily get confirmed after 6 or 10 blocks (now, though that can vary to a full day sometimes)
1382017-01-21T18:41:24 *** whphhg has quit IRC
1392017-01-21T18:42:37 *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402017-01-21T18:43:14 <BlueMatt> eg i just tested a tx with 0.1 sat/byte fee, and it had issues propagating, but was even still confirmed in 5 blocks
1412017-01-21T18:43:38 <BlueMatt> but every fee estimation anywhere returns >50 sat/byte
1422017-01-21T18:45:01 <sipa> 0.1 sat/byte? you mean 25 sat for a full transaction?
1432017-01-21T18:45:21 <sipa> are you sure you're not off by an order of magnitude or 2?
1442017-01-21T18:45:32 <BlueMatt> https://btc.com/1b4c848a30a73c805b36ec19142b9407fb74ffe9e41000ee87fadea8c6f582b5
1452017-01-21T18:45:36 <BlueMatt> yes, 25 sat for the whole thing
1462017-01-21T18:46:15 <gmaxwell> 1s/b is absurdly low, I don't think having a floor around that point is a problem.
1472017-01-21T18:46:34 <gmaxwell> we do need to have a meaningful relay floor to prevent DOS attacks.
1482017-01-21T18:46:37 <BlueMatt> sure, 1s/b whatever, but the floor is currently like 50
1492017-01-21T18:46:52 <BlueMatt> i'm not complaining about relay issues, i dont care it wasnt relayed
1502017-01-21T18:47:07 <BlueMatt> the issue is that all fee estimation stuff is currently off by an order of magnitude
1512017-01-21T18:50:52 <BlueMatt> ironically the only one i could find that has reasonable recommendations is by a miner: https://btc.com/stats/unconfirmed-tx
1522017-01-21T18:51:03 <BlueMatt> (ofc its looking at mempool state, which is also kinda shit, but...)
1532017-01-21T18:54:17 <gmaxwell> mempool state is great, if you're getting it from a miner.
1542017-01-21T18:54:46 <TD-Linux> shouldn't overpaying be easy to verify by running the estimator against historical data?
1552017-01-21T18:54:55 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well, fair
1562017-01-21T18:54:57 <gmaxwell> (thus have no issues with non-standard txn, and no its complete)
1572017-01-21T18:55:00 <gmaxwell> er know
1582017-01-21T18:55:51 <gmaxwell> part of the challenge is miners that @#$@# set their blocksize to less than the maximum... hard for an estimator to know if the block wasn't full because there wasn't supply or because the size was artifically restricted.
1592017-01-21T18:56:11 <BlueMatt> TD-Linux: current algorithms are all of the "look at what we had already seen on the public network get into a block to avoid any trickery by miners" variety....the problem is these algorithms tend to have no way to correct downwards if everyone is using them
1602017-01-21T18:56:40 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yea, and lots of shit that pays 0.1 sat/byte that gets mined :p
1612017-01-21T18:59:32 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: lots of things that get pushed through miner priority interfaces and pays god knows what gets mined.
1622017-01-21T18:59:42 <BlueMatt> yea, that too
1632017-01-21T19:00:20 <BlueMatt> I dont have a solution, just noting that things are currently Fucked (tm)
1642017-01-21T19:00:37 <gmaxwell> which is why you can't simply use the existance of low fee txn getting mined as a measurement of anything. You need to use things not getting mined as your measurement. :)
1652017-01-21T19:01:46 <BlueMatt> lol, yes, thank you, I'm well aware of restrictions, but also noting things like mempools on many public nodes being <1MB and miners who post their mempool having the same thing is pretty strong supporting evidence of things being Fucked
1662017-01-21T19:02:04 <TD-Linux> BlueMatt, I don't see why they can't correct downward. they would just be delayed one block
1672017-01-21T19:02:24 <TD-Linux> err nevermind I see.
1682017-01-21T19:02:25 <BlueMatt> TD-Linux: well /someone/ has to be generating such transactions for that to happen, and in sufficient volume
1692017-01-21T19:02:44 <sipa> i nominate BlueMatt to do the low fee tx creation job
1702017-01-21T19:03:02 <BlueMatt> lol, i nominate petertodd...doesnt he already?
1712017-01-21T19:04:20 <gmaxwell> we might want to consider renaming the commandline arguments for minimum relay fee... so as to throw off settings people set back during the flood attacks before there was mempool limiting that have just been forgotten.
1722017-01-21T19:04:34 <BlueMatt> yea, i was wondering about that
1732017-01-21T19:04:47 <gmaxwell> petertodd does create low fee txn, IIRC the openstransactions stuff produces 1s/b transactions and just RBFs them until they get mined.
1742017-01-21T19:04:54 <BlueMatt> yup
1752017-01-21T19:05:31 <BlueMatt> yea, I'm now wondering how much of this comes from stuff failing to relay quickly due to shit like that
1762017-01-21T19:06:34 <TD-Linux> does anyone collect public historical mempool data?
1772017-01-21T19:06:48 <gmaxwell> what does public mean there?
1782017-01-21T19:07:31 <TD-Linux> posted publicly
1792017-01-21T19:08:28 <sipa> i sort of do
1802017-01-21T19:09:30 <gmaxwell> there are some websites with stats but they're all (?) borken because they're all (?) running the aformentioned adjusted settings.
1812017-01-21T19:09:54 <petertodd> gmaxwell: opentimestamps starts with the lowest fee bitcoin core will accept with default settings, and increments it by the minimum fee necessary to relay a replacement each time
1822017-01-21T19:09:57 <BlueMatt> or displaying miles of garbage that has been floating around for months :(
1832017-01-21T19:10:59 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: that would be an improvement...
1842017-01-21T19:11:34 <gmaxwell> well people aren't using charting interfaces that make sense. Megabytes of mempool is a worthless metric... should be 300 all the time, short of expiration.
1852017-01-21T19:11:46 <petertodd> gmaxwell: any miner with a mature mempool significantly greater than 1MB will likely be mining replacement OTS transactions rather than the first ones broadcast, assuming propagation is reasonably reliable anyway
1862017-01-21T19:11:58 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yea, its no where near that much of the time, however
1872017-01-21T19:12:20 <BlueMatt> petertodd: i think the propagation assumption is very weak :/
1882017-01-21T19:13:14 <petertodd> BlueMatt: last I checked the logs, usualy the OTS tx that actually gets mined is after multiple attempts, IIRC ~5 or so
1892017-01-21T19:13:34 <BlueMatt> petertodd: do you have stats on the propagation prior to that point?
1902017-01-21T19:14:48 <petertodd> BlueMatt: point is, after that many attempts, it's likely that at least one will have gotten through
1912017-01-21T19:15:36 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: well if you want to write a PR that renames the minrelayfee option... I'd test and ACK it.
1922017-01-21T19:16:25 <BlueMatt> yea, ok, willdo
1932017-01-21T19:16:33 <petertodd> BlueMatt: after # of replacements before a OTS tx gets mined is 11
1942017-01-21T19:18:46 <petertodd> BlueMatt: *average #
1952017-01-21T19:19:17 <BlueMatt> petertodd: yea, I'm curious about propagation
1962017-01-21T19:19:21 <BlueMatt> ping me next time it runs
1972017-01-21T19:20:15 <petertodd> BlueMatt: it's a fully automated thing that's constantly running...
1982017-01-21T19:20:39 <BlueMatt> well whats the current txid/feerate?
1992017-01-21T19:20:57 <petertodd> BlueMatt: in 44s I'll give you a txid...
2002017-01-21T19:21:47 <petertodd> BlueMatt: oh, wait, no a bit longer than that... gotta wait for a block
2012017-01-21T19:22:58 <petertodd> BlueMatt: after a timestamp is confirmed, it waits a minimum timeout interval, then sends a timestamp tx the next time a block is found; after that every block found results in the fees being bumped
2022017-01-21T19:24:32 <BlueMatt> k
2032017-01-21T19:27:23 *** wvr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042017-01-21T19:33:32 <petertodd> BlueMatt: just checked my logs, looks like 50% of the time where multiple replacements happen, the last replacement to be sent is the one that gets mined
2052017-01-21T19:34:01 <petertodd> BlueMatt: so I'd say that's pretty suggestive evidence that about 50% of the hashing power is mining opt-in RBF
2062017-01-21T19:34:54 <petertodd> here's a recently sent txid, the start of a new replacement chain: 2adceebdd5149b9f6c27764f7a619e69487e55ac37bee2d6f492067585b23f0e
2072017-01-21T19:34:59 <BlueMatt> hmm, or at least a big chunk (eg btcc and bitfury, i assume)
2082017-01-21T19:36:44 <BlueMatt> in any case, regarding ignoring opt-in rbf for fee calculation, i suppose it might make sense if we only use it for high-confirmation requests (eg 3/10 confirmations)
2092017-01-21T19:36:45 <gmaxwell> well it's really easy to see who does and doesn't... the ones that don't (e.g. viabtc) collect a lot less in fees.
2102017-01-21T19:36:57 <BlueMatt> but it certainly will have an impact on our 95% threshold
2112017-01-21T19:38:21 <petertodd> BlueMatt: https://0bin.net/paste/zzWuyYFWyZdkufmh#Y8Zwe0qb684VrruOQC8ZbQ2ovgqE3XLXoe-Ca+w4xn0 <- look for yourself; that's all the replacement chain ends since september
2122017-01-21T19:57:05 <morcos> BlueMatt: take a deep breath! this is actually one thing fee estimatation does pretty well
2132017-01-21T19:57:20 <morcos> (oops, didn't catch up all the way on backlog)
2142017-01-21T19:57:53 <morcos> the reason we don't get estimates that low is the threshold is set very high and we don't have estimates for greater than 25 blocks
2152017-01-21T19:58:13 <BlueMatt> im aware
2162017-01-21T19:58:30 <BlueMatt> but that doesnt explain why estimates are currently in the 50s, and not the 10s
2172017-01-21T19:59:24 <morcos> it does explain, the estimate is answering the question of i want a 95% chance of being filled in my target
2182017-01-21T19:59:39 <morcos> 10s will not get you filled withing 25 blocks wiht 95% chance
2192017-01-21T19:59:53 <BlueMatt> yes, see later discussion, i believe that is in part due to propagation issues
2202017-01-21T20:00:39 <morcos> 10 sat very recently has had a 75% of being confirmed in 16 blocks and over a longer time period a 75% chance of being confirmed in 32 blocks
2212017-01-21T20:00:46 <morcos> for 95% chance you have to go up to a whole day
2222017-01-21T20:00:59 <morcos> thats not due to propagation issues i doubt
2232017-01-21T20:01:05 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-01-21T20:01:08 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2252017-01-21T20:01:11 <morcos> i think pretty much everyone would propagate > 10s byte
2262017-01-21T20:01:27 <morcos> thats due to blocks being mostly full of stuff that pay more than that
2272017-01-21T20:01:33 <morcos> as mentioned, recently it has come down
2282017-01-21T20:01:56 <BlueMatt> im not convinced...many blocks being generated now are not full because there arent txn to include if you make 8 outbound connections
2292017-01-21T20:02:24 <BlueMatt> on some of my public non-listening nodes they do not have 1MB of txn in their mempool
2302017-01-21T20:02:42 <BlueMatt> (and havent all day)
2312017-01-21T20:03:51 <morcos> i'd bet you just happen to be looking at lull in transaction backlog
2322017-01-21T20:04:10 <BlueMatt> these nodes have been online for months
2332017-01-21T20:04:11 <morcos> if it stays like this for a week... estimates will come down
2342017-01-21T20:04:27 <BlueMatt> thats possible, but also concerning
2352017-01-21T20:04:30 <morcos> yes, i'm saying a few days ago.. your mempool had more expensive txs in it
2362017-01-21T20:04:36 <BlueMatt> 10 sat very recently has had a 75% of being confirmed in 16 blocks
2372017-01-21T20:04:42 <BlueMatt> what is your "very recently"?
2382017-01-21T20:05:40 <morcos> checking.. normal fee esitmation has a half life of about 2.5 days
2392017-01-21T20:06:16 <morcos> i have a node with short term and long term estimates
2402017-01-21T20:06:29 <morcos> the short term estimate has halflife of 6 hours
2412017-01-21T20:07:08 <morcos> sigh.. just realized it crashed 2 days ago... so that number was from 2 days ago
2422017-01-21T20:07:17 <BlueMatt> ahh, grrr
2432017-01-21T20:09:29 <morcos> it is true that the existing algorithm doesn't respond very quickly to changes in conditions
2442017-01-21T20:09:36 <morcos> anyway.. i have to run now.. i'll restart that node
2452017-01-21T20:09:49 <morcos> and we can discuss in more detail later.. but i have TONS of historical data on this...
2462017-01-21T20:10:11 *** Netmage has quit IRC
2472017-01-21T20:10:31 <morcos> the most important thing to actually let people place lower fee txs would be to have a way to say something like i want a 75% change of being confirmed in the next 6 hours
2482017-01-21T20:10:44 <morcos> in otherwords be able to decrease confidence and increase target
2492017-01-21T20:10:57 <morcos> then you'll get much lower estimates
2502017-01-21T20:11:48 <BlueMatt> yes, I super think we should set lower confidence thresholds for people who ask about 20 blocks
2512017-01-21T20:12:16 <BlueMatt> i mean if you're asking about 20 blocks I'd hope you understand its +/- 100 at that point
2522017-01-21T20:12:37 <morcos> agree entirely
2532017-01-21T20:12:54 <morcos> and its easy to do combo stuff
2542017-01-21T20:13:15 <morcos> ok well they want 20 blocks lets give them a 50% chance its within 20, but a 90% chance its within 40
2552017-01-21T20:13:39 <morcos> i mean you just ask both questions and give the max
2562017-01-21T20:13:45 <BlueMatt> yea
2572017-01-21T20:13:55 <BlueMatt> i mean that sounds like a uselessly complicated api
2582017-01-21T20:14:07 <BlueMatt> (how many people will actually use that?) but maybe
2592017-01-21T20:14:23 <morcos> well yeah i'm assuming that the default will be that happens behind the scenes
2602017-01-21T20:14:57 <morcos> but that if for some reason you don't like whatever magic core is doing, then you can ask the direct questions
2612017-01-21T20:14:58 <BlueMatt> sure, ok
2622017-01-21T20:15:03 <morcos> anwyay, lets discuss later...
2632017-01-21T20:15:08 <morcos> got to run
2642017-01-21T20:38:00 *** protomar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652017-01-21T20:55:14 *** Soligor has quit IRC
2662017-01-21T21:07:56 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672017-01-21T21:27:05 *** Soligor has quit IRC
2682017-01-21T21:31:48 *** Sosumi has quit IRC
2692017-01-21T21:40:25 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702017-01-21T21:53:50 *** waxwing has quit IRC
2712017-01-21T22:01:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2722017-01-21T22:02:08 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732017-01-21T22:16:18 *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742017-01-21T22:19:05 *** Soligor has quit IRC
2752017-01-21T22:23:23 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762017-01-21T22:27:50 *** Soligor has quit IRC
2772017-01-21T22:28:45 <morcos> BlueMatt: I have another node that has been consistently running that keeps estimates out to 1000 blocks but only at the default decay...
2782017-01-21T22:29:54 <morcos> For now it has enough data to accurately report lower fee rates.. but you are right actually that there are very few txs down there.. and so if no one is asking about those less quick confirmations.. (b/c we don't give them a way to)
2792017-01-21T22:30:22 <morcos> then no one will places txs at those lower feerates and we may eventually not have any data points
2802017-01-21T22:31:16 <morcos> so probably we should provide that opportunity sooner rather than later.. i wrote the code over a year ago.. but it was a bit complicated and i didn't want to worry about tryng to get it reviewed
2812017-01-21T22:32:29 <morcos> anyway, here is some data.. # blocks target: 95% threshold (current default) , 75% target (maybe what we could give)
2822017-01-21T22:33:56 <morcos> 16: 60000 , 4600
2832017-01-21T22:35:09 <morcos> 32: 40000, 4600
2842017-01-21T22:36:16 <morcos> 64: 10000, 2500 (can't get lower due to lack of data)
2852017-01-21T22:37:15 <morcos> 128: 4600, 2500
2862017-01-21T22:38:14 <morcos> My guess is things less than 10000 (10 sat/byte) have a problem reaching the very high thresholds b/c there are probably some miners with minrelayfee set at 10
2872017-01-21T22:39:47 <morcos> for good measure
2882017-01-21T22:40:05 <morcos> 8: 65000, 15000
2892017-01-21T22:46:46 *** protomar has quit IRC
2902017-01-21T23:12:05 *** JackH has quit IRC
2912017-01-21T23:30:46 <BlueMatt> morcos: units???
2922017-01-21T23:32:04 <gmaxwell> So I have a question-- would we ever want to have support for trusted feerate information? e.g. to be used when your own estimator doesn't have enough data, or such that it only decreases your estimates?
2932017-01-21T23:33:32 <BlueMatt> if we have bumpfee........maybe
2942017-01-21T23:33:58 <BlueMatt> i mean its not like all other wallets dont have to....
2952017-01-21T23:47:06 <luke-jr> if you mean alert-style signed-by-someone, I think it would need to be outside the reference codebase probably, unless we want to change the policy on such things altogether
2962017-01-21T23:47:48 <luke-jr> unless perhaps it'd be signed by the miners themselves
2972017-01-21T23:53:48 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982017-01-21T23:59:27 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I mean something you could configure, which wouldn't have a default. "Get fee estimates from key XYZ"
2992017-01-21T23:59:42 <gmaxwell> (or really, multisig withnessscripthash)