Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

require bitcoind >= v24.0 or conditionally use gettxspendingprevout #7703

Closed
Crypt-iQ opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 9 comments · Fixed by #8019
Closed

require bitcoind >= v24.0 or conditionally use gettxspendingprevout #7703

Crypt-iQ opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 9 comments · Fixed by #8019
Assignees
Labels
bitcoind Bitcoin Core backend mempool
Milestone

Comments

@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator

The mempool issues should be solvable by using the gettxspendingprevout RPC so we don't have to scan the mempool at the btcwallet level. We could either conditionally call this if the bitcoind version is >= v24.0 or we could require people to upgrade their bitcoind versions.

@Crypt-iQ Crypt-iQ added bitcoind Bitcoin Core backend mempool labels May 16, 2023
@Crypt-iQ Crypt-iQ changed the title require bitcoind v24.0 or conditionally use gettxspendingprevout require bitcoind >= v24.0 or conditionally use gettxspendingprevout May 16, 2023
@saubyk saubyk added this to the v0.18.0 milestone May 16, 2023
@shaurya947
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Crypt-iQ I was hoping to learn more about the specific mempool issues that you mentioned. Could you please offer a high-level explanation or link me to any other issues/docs that have some explanations? I would like to potentially attempt this once I can understand it better 🙏

@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hi @shaurya947 unfortunately I don't think this is suitable for newer contributors to attempt and we'll probably do this one internally

@yyforyongyu
Copy link
Member

If we are upgrading bitcoind version, we can also make use of getblockfrompeer when running pruned bitcoins, and deprecate the custom logic introduced in btcwallet.chain.

@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator Author

If we are upgrading bitcoind version, we can also make use of getblockfrompeer when running pruned bitcoins, and deprecate the custom logic introduced in btcwallet.chain.

What do we do in btcwallet.chain? I think getblockfrompeer can fail

@yyforyongyu
Copy link
Member

What do we do in btcwallet.chain?

We use it here. When running in pruned mode we'd fetch blocks from our peers when needed.

I think getblockfrompeer can fail

Fail as the block cannot be found or the peer doesn't support it?

@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator Author

What do we do in btcwallet.chain?

We use it here. When running in pruned mode we'd fetch blocks from our peers when needed.

I think getblockfrompeer can fail

Fail as the block cannot be found or the peer doesn't support it?

It should be fine to use, since we're copying what it does already. It uses regular block fetching under the hood

@saubyk saubyk modified the milestones: Low Priority, v0.18.0 Aug 4, 2023
@saubyk saubyk added this to lnd v0.18 Aug 8, 2023
@saubyk saubyk moved this to 🔖 Ready in lnd v0.18 Aug 8, 2023
@ProofOfKeags ProofOfKeags self-assigned this Aug 16, 2023
@saubyk saubyk assigned Crypt-iQ and unassigned ProofOfKeags Aug 30, 2023
@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Crypt-iQ commented Sep 7, 2023

PR btcsuite/btcwallet#887

@saubyk saubyk removed this from lnd v0.18 Sep 14, 2023
@saubyk saubyk modified the milestones: v0.18.0, v0.17.1 Sep 14, 2023
@Roasbeef
Copy link
Member

btcsuite/btcwallet#887 has been merged, so we can close this after we bump the btcwallet version in lnd.

@Crypt-iQ
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Crypt-iQ commented Oct 2, 2023

This should be fixed with #8019 since the batch PR will get merged after the already merged btcsuite/btcwallet#887

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bitcoind Bitcoin Core backend mempool
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants