wallet: Add listrawtransactions RPC#35813
Conversation
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. Code Coverage & BenchmarksFor details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/35813. ReviewsSee the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process. |
|
🚧 At least one of the CI tasks failed. HintsTry to run the tests locally, according to the documentation. However, a CI failure may still
Leave a comment here, if you need help tracking down a confusing failure. |
Add a new `listrawtransactions` RPC that returns wallet transactions without logical interpretation. Unlike `listtransactions`, which only lists transactions with an economic category (sends to external addresses, receives from outside), this RPC returns every transaction the wallet knows about — including consolidations and self-transfers that would otherwise be invisible. Each transaction appears exactly once with its net wallet balance change (`amount`) and, when the wallet funded the transaction, the fee paid (`fee`). Pagination is supported via `count` and `skip` parameters, matching the interface of `listtransactions`.
2ca8449 to
1555198
Compare
Add a new
listrawtransactionsRPC that returns wallet transactions without logical interpretation. Unlikelisttransactions, which only lists transactions with an economic category (sends to external addresses, receives from outside), this RPC returns every transaction the wallet knows about — including consolidations and self-transfers that would otherwise be invisible.Each transaction appears exactly once with its net wallet balance change (
amount) and, when the wallet funded the transaction, the fee paid (fee). Pagination is supported viacountandskipparameters, matching the interface oflisttransactions.Next possible follow-ups:
"all"/"received"/"sent"/"self") once per-tx semantics are agreed onTransactionDescriptionString()carry references tocategory(e.g.replaced_by_txid,parent_descs) which don't apply here — could be cleaned up in a separate passCloses #34632.
Previous attempt: #35009 (by alfonsoromanz), closed in favour of a separate RPC as suggested by achow101.