94ed4fbf8e Add release note for size 2 package rbf (Greg Sanders)
afd52d8e63 doc: update package RBF comment (Greg Sanders)
6e3c4394cf mempool: Improve logging of replaced transactions (Greg Sanders)
d3466e4cc5 CheckPackageMempoolAcceptResult: Check package rbf invariants (Greg Sanders)
316d7b63c9 Fuzz: pass mempool to CheckPackageMempoolAcceptResult (Greg Sanders)
4d15bcf448 [test] package rbf (glozow)
dc21f61c72 [policy] package rbf (Suhas Daftuar)
5da3967815 PackageV3Checks: Relax assumptions (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
Allows any 2 transaction package with no in-mempool ancestors to do package RBF when directly conflicting with other mempool clusters of size two or less.
Proposed validation steps:
1) If the transaction package is of size 1, legacy rbf rules apply.
2) Otherwise the transaction package consists of a (parent, child) pair with no other in-mempool ancestors (or descendants, obviously), so it is also going to create a cluster of size 2. If larger, fail.
3) The package rbf may not evict more than 100 transactions from the mempool(bip125 rule 5)
4) The package is a single chunk
5) Every directly conflicted mempool transaction is connected to at most 1 other in-mempool transaction (ie the cluster size of the conflict is at most 2).
6) Diagram check: We ensure that the replacement is strictly superior, improving the mempool
7) The total fee of the package, minus the total fee of what is being evicted, is at least the minrelayfee * size of the package (equivalent to bip125 rule 3 and 4)
Post-cluster mempool this will likely be expanded to general package rbf, but this is what we can safely support today.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 94ed4fbf8e
glozow:
reACK 94ed4fbf8e via range-diff
ismaelsadeeq:
re-ACK 94ed4fbf8e
theStack:
Code-review ACK 94ed4fbf8e
murchandamus:
utACK 94ed4fbf8e
Tree-SHA512: 9bd383e695964f362f147482bbf73b1e77c4d792bda2e91d7f30d74b3540a09146a5528baf86854a113005581e8c75f04737302517b7d5124296bd7a151e3992
881724d443 test: Added test coverage to listsinceblock rpc (kevkevinpal)
Pull request description:
This change is meant to add test coverage to this rpc error https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/rpc/transactions.cpp#L666C53-L666C79
This is done by renaming the first block in the blocks folder
---
Doing a quick grep for the error code in our functional tests leads to zero results
`grep -nri "Can't read block from disk" ./test/functional/`
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 881724d443
tdb3:
re ACK for 881724d443
rkrux:
tACK [881724](881724d443)
Tree-SHA512: c5dff20cf014d0181f49d6b161f1364e1c6b79e8661047f77f07e21e59f4d1f2fd6f745538c8fc5bd6d4244650a840dd64d184634366f7c21fa67141a60af44a
5cf0a1f230 test: add `createmultisig` P2MS encoding test for all n (1..20) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
0570d2c204 test: add unit test for `keys_to_multisig_script` (Sebastian Falbesoner)
0c41fc3fa5 test: fix `keys_to_multisig_script` (P2MS) helper for n/k > 16 (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
While reviewing #28307, I noticed that the test framework's `key_to_multisig_script` helper (introduced in #23305) is broken for pubkey count (n) and threshold (k) values larger than 16. This is due to the implementation currently enforcing a direct single-byte data push (using `CScriptOp.encode_op_n`), which obviously fails for values 17+. Fix that by passing the numbers directly to the CScript list, where it's automatically converted to minimally-encoded pushes (see class method `CScript.__coerce_instance`, branch `isinstance(other, int)`).
The second commit adds a unit test to ensure that the encoding is correct.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 5cf0a1f230
tdb3:
ACK 5cf0a1f230
rkrux:
reACK [5cf0a1f](5cf0a1f230)
Tree-SHA512: 4168a165c3f483ec8e37a27dba1628a7ea0063545a2b7e74d9e20d753fddd7e33d37e1a190434fa6dca39adf9eef5d0211f7a0c1c7b44979f0a3bb350e267562
Adds argument --resultsfile to test_runner.py.
Writes comma-separated functional test name, status,
and duration to the file provided with the argument.
Also fixes minor typo in test_runner.py
f58beabe75 test: bumpfee with user specified fee_rate ignores walletIncrementalRelayFee (ismaelsadeeq)
436e88f433 bumpfee: ignore WALLET_INCREMENTAL_RELAY_FEE when user specifies fee rate (ismaelsadeeq)
Pull request description:
Fixes #26973
When using the `bumpfee` RPC and manually specifying `fee_rate`, there should be no requirement that the new fee must be at least the sum of the original fee and `incrementalFee` (maximum of `relayIncrementalFee` and `WALLET_INCREMENTAL_RELAY_FEE`).
This restriction should only apply when user did not specify `fee_rate`.
> because the GUI doesn't let the user specify the new fee rate yet (https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/647), it would be very annoying to have to bump 20 times to increment by 20 sat/vbyte.
The restriction should instead be the new fee must be at least the sum of the original fee and `incrementalFee` (`relayIncrementalFee`)
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK f58beabe75
murchandamus:
ACK f58beabe75
Tree-SHA512: 193259f87173b7d5a8e68e0e29f2ca7e75c550e3cf0dee3d6d822b5b1e07c2e6dec0bfc8fb435855736ebced97a10dbdbfef72e8c5abde06fdefcba122f2e7f1
429ec1aaaa refactor: Rename CTransaction::nVersion to version (Ava Chow)
27e70f1f5b consensus: Store transaction nVersion as uint32_t (Ava Chow)
Pull request description:
Given that the use of a transaction's nVersion is always as an unsigned int, it doesn't make sense to store it as signed and then cast it to unsigned everywhere it is used and displayed.
Since a few alternative implementations have recently been revealed to have made an error with this signedness that would have resulted in consensus failure, I think it makes sense for us to just make this always unsigned to make it clear that the version is treated as unsigned. This would also help us avoid future potential issues with signedness of this value.
I believe that this is safe and does not actually change what transactions would or would not be considered both standard and consensus valid. Within consensus, the only use of the version in consensus is in BIP68 validation which was already casting it to uint32_t. Within policy, although it is used as a signed int for the transaction version number check, I do not think that this change would change standardness. Standard transactions are limited to the range [1, 2]. Negative numbers would have fallen under the < 1 condition, but by making it unsigned, they are still non-standard under the > 2 condition.
Unsigned and signed ints are serialized and unserialized the same way so there is no change in serialization.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
ACK 429ec1aaaa 🐿
glozow:
ACK 429ec1aaaa
shaavan:
ACK 429ec1aaaa💯
Tree-SHA512: 0bcd92a245d7d16c3665d2d4e815a4ef28207ad4a1fb46c6f0203cdafeab1b82c4e95e4bdce7805d80a4f4a46074f6542abad708e970550d38a00d759e3dcef1
24bc46c83b cli: Add warning for duplicate port definition (tdb3)
e208fb5d3b cli: Sanitize ports in rpcconnect and rpcport (tdb3)
Pull request description:
Adds invalid port detection to bitcoin-cli for -rpcconnect and -rpcport.
In addition to detecting malformed/invalid ports (e.g. those outside of the 16-bit port range, not numbers, etc.), bitcoin-cli also now considers usage of port 0 to be invalid. bitcoin-cli previously considered port 0 to be valid and attempted to use it to reach bitcoind.
Functional tests were added for invalid port detection as well as port prioritization.
Additionally, a warning is provided when a port is specified in both -rpcconnect and -rpcport.
This PR is an alternate approach to PR #27820 (e.g. SplitHostPort is unmodified).
Considered an alternative to 127.0.0.1 being specified in functional tests, but at first glance, this might need an update to test_framework/util.py (e.g. rpc_url), which might be left to a future PR.
ACKs for top commit:
S3RK:
light code review ACK 24bc46c83b
achow101:
ACK 24bc46c83b
cbergqvist:
re ACK 24bc46c83b
Tree-SHA512: c83ab6a30a08dd1ac8b368a7dcc2b4f23170f0b61dd67ffcad7bcda05096d333bcb9821fba11018151f55b2929c0a333bfec15b8bb863d83f41fc1974c6efca5
ab98e6fd03 test: add coverage for errors for `combinerawtransaction` RPC (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds test coverage for the following errors for the `combinerawtransaction` RPC:
* Tx decode failed
* Missing transactions
* Input not found or already spent
For reference: https://maflcko.github.io/b-c-cov/total.coverage/src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp.gcov.html
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
lgtm ACK ab98e6fd03
tdb3:
ACK ab98e6fd03
Tree-SHA512: 8a133c25dad2e1b236e0278a88796f60f763e3fd6fbbc080f926bb23f9dcc55599aa242d6e0c4ec15a179d9ded10a1f17ee5b6063719107ea84e6099f10416b2
0000276b31 test: Remove redundant verack check (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Currently the sync in `connect_nodes` mentions the `version` and `verack` message types, but only checks the `verack`. Neither check is required, as the `pong` check implies both. In case of failure, the debug log will have to be consulted anyway, so the redundant check doesn't add value.
Also clarify in the comments that the goal is to check the flag `fSuccessfullyConnected` indirectly.
ACKs for top commit:
furszy:
utACK 0000276b31
brunoerg:
ACK 0000276b31
tdb3:
ACK 0000276b31
Tree-SHA512: f9ddcb1436d2f70da462a8dd470ecfc90a534dd6507c23877ef7626e7c02326c077001a42ad0171a87fba5c5275d1970d8c5e5d82c56c8412de944856fdfd6db
39d135e79f test: MiniWallet: respect fee_rate for target_weight, use in mempool_limit.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
b2f0a9f8b0 test: add framework functional test for MiniWallet's tx padding (Sebastian Falbesoner)
c17550bc3a test: MiniWallet: fix tx padding (`target_weight`) for large sizes, improve accuracy (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
MiniWallet allows to create padded transactions that are equal or slightly above a certain `target_weight` (first introduced in PR #25379, commit 1d6b438ef0), which can be useful especially for mempool-related tests, e.g. for policy limit checks or scenarios to trigger mempool eviction. Currently the `target_weight` parameter doesn't play together with `fee_rate` though, as the fee calculation is incorrectly based on the tx vsize before the padding output is added, so the fee-rate is consequently far off. This means users are forced to pass an absolute fee, which can be quite inconvenient and leads to lots of duplicated "calculate absolute fee from fee-rate and vsize" code with the pattern `fee = (feerate / 1000) * (weight // 4)` on the call-sites.
This PR first improves the tx padding itself to be more accurate, adds a functional test for it, and fixes the `fee_rate` treatment for the `{create,send}_self_transfer` methods. (Next step would be to enable this also for the `_self_transfer_multi` methods, but those currently don't even offer a `fee_rate` parameter). Finally, the ability to pass both `target_weight` and `fee_rate` is used in the `mempool_limit.py` functional test. There might be more use-cases in other tests, that could be done in a follow-up.
ACKs for top commit:
rkrux:
tACK [39d135e](39d135e79f)
ismaelsadeeq:
Code Review ACK 39d135e79f🚀
glozow:
light review ACK 39d135e79f
Tree-SHA512: 6bf8e853a921576d463291d619cdfd6a7e74cf92f61933a563800ac0b3c023a06569b581243166906f56b3c5e8858fec2d8a6910d55899e904221f847eb0953d
f68cba29b3 blockman: Replace m_reindexing with m_blockfiles_indexed (Ryan Ofsky)
1b1c6dcca0 test: Add functional test for continuing a reindex (TheCharlatan)
201c1a9282 indexes: Don't wipe indexes again when already reindexing (TheCharlatan)
804f09dfa1 kernel: Add less confusing reindex options (Ryan Ofsky)
e172553223 validation: Remove needs_init from LoadBlockIndex (TheCharlatan)
533eab7d67 bugfix: Streamline setting reindex option (TheCharlatan)
Pull request description:
When restarting `bitcoind` during an ongoing reindex without setting the `-reindex` flag again, the block and coins db is left intact, but any data from the optional indexes is discarded. While not a bug per se, wiping the data again is
wasteful, both in terms of having to write it again, as well as potentially leading to longer startup times. So keep the index data instead when continuing a prior reindex.
Also includes a bugfix and smaller code cleanups around the reindexing code. The bug was introduced in b47bd95920: "kernel: De-globalize fReindex".
ACKs for top commit:
stickies-v:
ACK f68cba29b3
fjahr:
Code review ACK f68cba29b3
furszy:
Code review ACK f68cba29b3
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK f68cba29b3. Only changes since last review were cherry-picking suggested commits that rename variables, improving comments, and making some tweaks to test code.
Tree-SHA512: b252228cc76e9f1eaac56d5bd9e4eac23408e0fc04aeffd97a85417f046229364673ee1ca7410b9b6e7b692b03f13ece17c42a10176da0d7e975a8915deb98ca
1f6ab1215b minor: remove unnecessary semicolons from RPC content type examples (Matthew Zipkin)
b225295298 test: use json-rpc 2.0 in all functional tests by default (Matthew Zipkin)
391843b029 bitcoin-cli: use json-rpc 2.0 (Matthew Zipkin)
d39bdf3397 test: remove unused variable in interface_rpc.py (Matthew Zipkin)
0ead71df8c doc: update and link for JSON-RPC 2.0 (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up to #27101.
- Addresses [post-merge comments ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27101#discussion_r1606723428)
- bitcoin-cli uses JSON-RPC 2.0
- functional tests use JSON-RPC 2.0 by default (exceptions are in the regression tests added by #27101)
ACKs for top commit:
tdb3:
ACK 1f6ab1215b
cbergqvist:
ACK 1f6ab1215b
Tree-SHA512: 49bf14c70464081280216ece538a2f5ec810bac80a86a83ad3284f0f1b017edf755a1a74a45be279effe00218170cafde7c2de58aed07097a95c2c6b837a6b6c
In order to ensure that the change of nVersion to a uint32_t in the
previous commit has no effect, rename nVersion to version in this commit
so that reviewers can easily spot if a spot was missed or if there is a
check somewhere whose semantics have changed.
30a01134cd [doc] update bips.md for 431 (glozow)
9dbe6a03f0 [test] wallet uses CURRENT_VERSION which is 2 (glozow)
539404fe0f [policy] make v3 transactions standard (glozow)
052ede75af [refactor] use TRUC_VERSION in place of 3 (glozow)
Pull request description:
Make `nVersion=3` (which is currently nonstandard on mainnet) standard.
Note that we will treat these transactions as Topologically Restricted Until Confirmation (TRUC). Spec is in BIP 431 and implementation is in #28948, #29306, and #29873
See #27463 for overall project tracking, and #29319 for information about relevance to cluster mempool.
ACKs for top commit:
sdaftuar:
utACK 30a01134c
achow101:
ACK 30a01134cd
instagibbs:
utACK 30a01134cd
murchandamus:
ACK 30a01134cd
ismaelsadeeq:
ACK 30a01134cd🛰️
Tree-SHA512: 2a4aec0442c860e792a061d83e36483c1f1b426f946efbdf664c8db97a596e498b535707e1d3a900218429486ea69fd4552e3d476526a6883cbd5556c6534b48
fa52e13ee8 test: Remove struct.pack from almost all places (MarcoFalke)
fa826db477 scripted-diff: test: Use int.to_bytes over struct packing (MarcoFalke)
faf2a975ad test: Use int.to_bytes over struct packing (MarcoFalke)
faf3cd659a test: Normalize struct.pack format (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
`struct.pack` has many issues:
* The format string consists of characters that may be confusing and may need to be looked up in the documentation, as opposed to using easy to understand self-documenting code.
This lead to many test bugs, which weren't hit, which is fine, but still confusing. Ref: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29400, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29399, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29363, fa3886b7c6, ...
Fix all issues by using the built-in `int` helpers `to_bytes` via a scripted diff.
Review notes:
* For `struct.pack` and `int.to_bytes` the error behavior is the same, although the error messages are not identical.
* Two `struct.pack` remain. One for float serialization in a C++ code comment, and one for native serialization.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK fa52e13ee8
rkrux:
tACK [fa52e13](fa52e13ee8)
theStack:
Code-review ACK fa52e13ee8
Tree-SHA512: ee80d935b68ae43d1654b047e84ceb80abbd20306df35cca848b3f7874634b518560ddcbc7e714e2e7a19241e153dee64556dc4701287ae811e26e4f8c57fe3e
The helper assumes that the n and k values have to be provided as a
single byte push operation, which is only possible for values up to 16.
Fix that by passing the numbers directly to the CScript list, where it's
automatically converted to minimally-encoded pushes (see class
method `CScript.__coerce_instance`, branch `isinstance(other, int)`).
In case of 17..20, this means that the data-pushes are done with two
bytes using OP_PUSH1 (0x01), e.g. for n=20: 0x01,0x14
4444de152f test: Set mocktime in p2p_disconnect_ban.py to avoid intermittent test failure (MarcoFalke)
fa6aa4027c test: Fix typos and use names args (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Otherwise, the test may fail on slow hardware when running in valgrind.
Also, use named args for the absolute timepoint, while touching this file.
ACKs for top commit:
tdb3:
ACK for 4444de152f
AngusP:
re-ACK 4444de152f
Tree-SHA512: 660269c8dd18887d69b284f38656899caf028159ce83ddf921f3e9c080a5d0e663989f0e42b4baf4c4939f20f34da0e7e844dff9b7c91d0cab570c60958bd0e1
07aba8dd21 functional test: ensure confirmed utxo being sourced for 2nd chain (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
The test could fail/stop testing what we want if non-confirmed utxos become sourced through some internal change to `MiniWallet`; better to just fetch confirmed explicitly.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 07aba8dd21
ismaelsadeeq:
utACK 07aba8dd21
theStack:
ACK 07aba8dd21
Tree-SHA512: 66795fdf881139ed91bde0f8239a46bd9bc70bb311fa97c0e2b5537e1fd2a1fd36bf3a225fc77b9695deb835a9d6d29879aa1e05ea5054b9a33a400e199da014
2451a217dd test: addmultisigaddress, coverage for script size limits (furszy)
53302a0981 bugfix: addmultisigaddress, add unsupported operation for redeem scripts over 520 bytes (furszy)
9be6065cc0 test: coverage for 16-20 segwit multisig scripts (furszy)
9d9a91c4ea rpc: bugfix, incorrect segwit redeem script size used in signrawtransactionwithkey (furszy)
0c9fedfc45 fix incorrect multisig redeem script size limit for segwit (furszy)
f7a173b578 test: rpc_createmultisig, decouple 'test_sortedmulti_descriptors_bip67' (furszy)
4f33dbd8f8 test: rpc_createmultisig, decouple 'test_mixing_uncompressed_and_compressed_keys' (furszy)
25a81705d3 test: rpc_createmultisig, remove unnecessary checkbalances() (furszy)
b5a3289433 test: refactor, multiple cleanups in rpc_createmultisig.py (furszy)
3635d43268 test: rpc_createmultisig, remove manual wallet initialization (furszy)
Pull request description:
Fixing https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28250#issuecomment-1674830104 and more.
Currently, redeem scripts longer than 520 bytes, which are technically valid under segwit rules, have flaws in the following processes:
1) The multisig creation process fails to deduce the output descriptor, resulting in the generation of an incorrect descriptor. Additionally, the accompanying user warning is also inaccurate.
2) The `signrawtransactionwithkey` RPC command fail to sign them.
3) The legacy wallet `addmultisigaddress` wrongly discards them.
The issue arises because most of these flows are utilizing the legacy spkm keystore, which imposes
the [p2sh max redeem script size rule](ded6873340/src/script/signingprovider.cpp (L160)) on all scripts. Which blocks segwit redeem scripts longer than
the max element size in all the previously mentioned processes (`createmultisig`, `addmultisigaddress`, and
`signrawtransactionwithkey`).
This PR fixes the problem, enabling the creation of multisig output descriptors involving more than 15 keys and
allowing the signing of these scripts, along with other post-segwit redeem scripts that surpass the 520-byte
p2sh limit.
Important note:
Instead of adding support for these longer redeem scripts in the legacy wallet, an "unsupported operation"
error has been added. The reasons behind this decision are:
1) The introduction of this feature brings about a compatibility-breaking change that requires downgrade
protection; older wallets would be unable to interact with these "new" legacy wallets.
2) Considering the ongoing deprecation of the legacy spkm, this issue provides another compelling
reason to transition towards descriptors.
Testing notes:
To easily verify each of the fixes, I decoupled the tests into standalone commits. So they can be
cherry-picked on top of master. Where `rpc_createmultisig.py` (with and without the `--legacy-wallet`
arg) will fail without the bugs fixes commits.
Extra note:
The initial commits improves the `rpc_createmultisig.py` test in many ways. I found this test very
antiquated, screaming for an update and cleanup.
ACKs for top commit:
pinheadmz:
ACK 2451a217dd
theStack:
Code-review ACK 2451a217dd
achow101:
ACK 2451a217dd
Tree-SHA512: 71794533cbd46b3a1079fb4e9d190d3ea3b615de0cbfa443466e14f05e4616ca90e12ce2bf07113515ea8113e64a560ad572bb9ea9d4835b6fb67b6ae596167f
df6dc2aaae test: Assumeutxo: snapshots with less work should not be loaded (Hernan Marino)
Pull request description:
This PR adds a test which checks that snapshots with less accumulated work than the node's active chain, should not be loaded and return with an error. Although in a different context of discussion the missing test was detect in a thread in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29394 (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29394#discussion_r1484122214)
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
utACK df6dc2aaae
kevkevinpal:
utACK [df6dc2a](df6dc2aaae)
achow101:
ACK df6dc2aaae
alfonsoromanz:
Re ACK df6dc2aaae. Make is successful and the test passes.
Tree-SHA512: 07a394b4b288cc8ad3f66ed4e70dcda468db18113e9442eb7215cf491768432d55efaaa5b79d633094917e05475a30f0c5e4f64f8f2da293ba306891b4485560
71aae72e1f test: test sendall does ancestor aware funding (ishaanam)
36757941a0 wallet, rpc: implement ancestor aware funding for sendall (ishaanam)
544131f3fb rpc, test: test sendall spends unconfirmed change and unconfirmed inputs when specified (ishaanam)
Pull request description:
This PR:
- Adds a functional test that `sendall` spends unconfirmed change
- Adds a functional test that `sendall` spends regular unconfirmed inputs when specified by user
- Adds ancestor aware funding to `sendall` by using `calculateCombinedBumpFee` and adjusting the effective value accordingly
- Adds a functional test for ancestor aware funding in `sendall`
ACKs for top commit:
S3RK:
ACK 71aae72e1f
achow101:
ACK 71aae72e1f
furszy:
ACK 71aae72e1f
Tree-SHA512: acaeb7c65166ce53123a1d6cb5012197202246acc02ef9f37a28154cc93afdbd77c25e840ab79bdc7e0b88904014a43ab1ddea79d5337dc310ea210634ab61f0
2fd34ba504 Add sanity checks for various ATMPArgs booleans (Greg Sanders)
20d8936d8b [refactor] make some members MemPoolAccept-wide (glozow)
cbbfe719b2 cpfp carveout is excluded in packages (glozow)
69f7ab05ba Add m_allow_sibling_eviction as separate ATMPArgs flag (Greg Sanders)
57ee3029dd Add description for m_test_accept (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
First few commits of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984 to set the stage for the package RBF logic.
These refactors are preparation for evaluating an RBF in a multi-proposed-transaction context instead of only a single proposed transaction. Also, carveouts and sibling evictions only should work in single RBF cases so add logic to preclude multi-tx cases in the future.
No behavior changes aside from bailing earlier from failed carve-outs.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
reACK 2fd34ba504 via range-diff
sr-gi:
utACK [2fd34ba](2fd34ba504)
theStack:
re-ACK 2fd34ba504
Tree-SHA512: 5071c5b8d9b8d2c9faa278c8c4df31de288cb407a68e4d55544c588caff6c86160cce7825453549c6ed69e29d9ccb5ee2d4a518b18f563bfb12f2ced073fe42a
542e13b293 rpc: Enhance metadata of the dumptxoutset output (Fabian Jahr)
4d8e5edbaa assumeutxo: Add documentation on dumptxoutset serialization format (Fabian Jahr)
c14ed7f384 assumeutxo: Add test for changed coin size value (Fabian Jahr)
de95953d87 rpc: Optimize serialization disk space of dumptxoutset (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
The second attempt at implementing the `dumptxoutset` space optimization as suggested in #25675. Closes #25675.
This builds on the work done in #26045, addresses open feedback, adds some further improvements (most importantly usage of compact size), documentation, and an additional test.
The [original snapshot at height 830,000](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29551) came in at 10.82 GB. With this change, the same snapshot is 8.94 GB, a reduction of 17.4%.
This also enhances the metadata of the output file and adds the following data to allow for better error handling and make future upgrades easier:
- A newly introduced utxo set magic
- A version number
- The network magic
- The block height
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 542e13b293
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK 542e13b293
theStack:
ACK 542e13b293
Tree-SHA512: 0825d30e5c3c364062db3c6cbca4e3c680e6e6d3e259fa70c0c2b2a7020f24a47406a623582040988d5c7745b08649c31110df4c10656aa25f3f27eb35843d99
The behavior is not new, but this rule exits earlier than before.
Previously, a carve out could have been granted in PreChecks() but then
nullified in PackageMempoolChecks() when CheckPackageLimits() is called
with the default limits.
154b2b2296 [fuzz] V3_MAX_VSIZE and effective ancestor/descendant size limits (glozow)
a29f1df289 [policy] restrict all v3 transactions to 10kvB (glozow)
d578e2e354 [policy] explicitly require non-v3 for CPFP carve out (glozow)
Pull request description:
Opening for discussion / conceptual review.
We like the idea of a smaller maximum transaction size because:
- It lowers potential replacement cost (i.e. harder to do Rule 3 pinning via gigantic transaction)
- They are easier to bin-pack in block template production
- They equate to a tighter memory limit in data structures that are bounded by a number of transactions (e.g. orphanage and vExtraTxnForCompact). For example, the current memory bounds for orphanage is 100KvB * 100 = 40MB, and guaranteeing 1 tx per peer would require reserving a pretty large space.
History for `MAX_STANDARD_TX_WEIGHT=100KvB` (copied from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873#issuecomment-2115459510):
- 2010-09-13 In 3df62878c3 satoshi added a 100kB (MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN/5 with MBS_GEN = MAX_BLOCK_SIZE/2) limit on new transactions in CreateTransaction()
- 2013-02-04 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2273 In gavin gave that constant a name, and made it apply to transaction relay as well
Lowering `MAX_STANDARD_TX_WEIGHT` for all txns is not being proposed, as there are existing apps/protocols that rely on large transactions. However, it's been brought up that we should consider this for TRUCs (which is especially designed to avoid Rule 3 pinning).
This reduction should be ok because using nVersion=3 isn't standard yet, so this wouldn't break somebody's existing use case. If we find that this is too small, we can always increase it later. Decreasing would be much more difficult.
~[Expected size of a commitment transaction](https://github.com/lightning/bolts/blob/master/03-transactions.md#expected-weight-of-the-commitment-transaction) is within (900 + 172 * 483 + 224) / 4 = 21050vB~ EDIT: this is incorrect, but perhaps not something that should affect how we choose this number.
ACKs for top commit:
sdaftuar:
ACK 154b2b2296
achow101:
ACK 154b2b2296
instagibbs:
ACK 154b2b2296
t-bast:
ACK 154b2b2296
murchandamus:
crACK 154b2b2296
Tree-SHA512: 89392a460908a8ea9f547d90e00f5181de0eaa9d2c4f2766140a91294ade3229b3d181833cad9afc93a0d0e8c4b96ee2f5aeda7c50ad7e6f3a8320b9e0c5ae97
6629d1d0f8 test: improve robustness of connect_nodes() (furszy)
Pull request description:
Decoupled from #27837 because this can help other too, found it investigating a CI failure https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5805115213348864?logs=ci#L3200.
The `connect_nodes` function in the test framework relies on a stable number of peer
connections to verify that the new connection between the nodes is successfully established.
This approach is fragile, as any of the peers involved in the process can drop, lose, or
create a connection at any step, causing subsequent `wait_until` checks to stall indefinitely
even when the peers in question were connected successfully.
This commit improves the situation by using the nodes' subversion and the connection
direction (inbound/outbound) to identify the exact peer connection and perform the
checks exclusively on it.
ACKs for top commit:
stratospher:
reACK 6629d1d.
achow101:
ACK 6629d1d0f8
maflcko:
utACK 6629d1d0f8
AngusP:
re-ACK 6629d1d0f8
Tree-SHA512: 5f345c0ce49ea81b643e97c5cffd133e182838752c27592fcdeac14ad10919fb4b7ff38e289e42a7c3c638a170bd0d0b7a9cd493898997a2082a7b7ceef4aeeb
1e54d61c46 test: add coverage for `mapped_as` from `getrawaddrman` (brunoerg)
8c2714907d net: rpc: return peer's mapped AS in getrawaddrman (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds two new fields in `getrawaddrman` RPC: "mapped_as" and "source_mapped_as". These fields are used to return the ASN (Autonomous System Number) mapped to the peer and its source. With these informations we can have a better view of the bucketing logic with ASMap specially in projects like [addrman-observer](https://github.com/0xb10c/addrman-observer).
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK 1e54d61c46
virtu:
ACK [1e54d61](1e54d61c46)
0xB10C:
ACK 1e54d61c46
glozow:
ACK 1e54d61c46
Tree-SHA512: af86bcc7a2e69bebd3fa9eaa2e527e0758c44c0a958de7292514d5f99f8f01f5df3bae11400451268e0255f738ff3acccc77f48fe129937512f1e9d9963c4c5e
Test addresses are being mapped according to the ASMap
file provided properly. Compare the result of the `getrawaddrman`
RPC with the result from the ASMap Health Check.
