Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Allow UTXO locks to be written to wallet DB #23065
Allow UTXO locks to be written to wallet DB #23065
Changes from all commits
c527893
f13fc16
719ae92
077154f
d96b000
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Re #23065 (comment)
If you want to implement this breaking change then use the return value of
insert()
to know if the output was already locked and return false.Otherwise, the lock can be persisted but not in memory.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I'm not sure how this could happen. Upon thinking further, I think its fine to upgrade a memory-only lock to a persistent lock (this is useful if fundrawtransaction locked the spends and we want to persistently lock them afterward). But how could we end up with a persistent lock not in memory?
EDIT: I've updated the PR to allow persistently locking even if we already have a lock, to allow upgrading.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, doesn't happen now that unlock clears from memory and db.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But does it make sense to allow memory-only lock if it is already persisted?
EDIT: looks like this is not possible since lockunspent RPC checks if unspent is already locked.