/bitcoin

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bugfix: Correctly calculate priority when inputs are mined after dependent transactions enter the memory pool #7149

Closed
wants to merge 9 commits into
from
+321 −19

Conversation

Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
TX fees and policy
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
5 participants
@luke-jr @sipa @fanquake @jonasschnelli @morcos
@luke-jr
Member

luke-jr commented Dec 1, 2015

This is needed to restore proper CreateNewBlock functioning for unconfirmed transaction chains.

@jonasschnelli jonasschnelli added the TX fees and policy label Dec 2, 2015

@morcos morcos referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2015

Merged

Lower bound priority #7008

@luke-jr
Member

luke-jr commented Jan 13, 2016

Added RPC tests and fixed an additional bug found with them. This should now be ready for merging to master and 0.12.

@sdaftuar sdaftuar referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2016

Merged

0.12 release notes: Mining Policy Changes #7346

@sipa
Owner

sipa commented Jun 2, 2016

Weak concept NACK. I don't think we should be spending effort on maintaining the old priority system (which was completely arbirary anyway).

luke-jr added a commit to bitcoinknots/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2016

@luke-jr
Merge #7149 bugfix_priority
fbe78b2

luke-jr added a commit to bitcoinknots/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2016

@luke-jr
Merge #7149 bugfix_priority
cf9b330

morcos and others added some commits Jun 30, 2015

@morcos @luke-jr
Add GetStartingPriority method to reliably get the original priority … 
…of a transaction in the mempool
c6c89bb
@morcos @luke-jr
Change GetPriority calculation to dynamically update 
Track the value of inputs that get confirmed in the chain and keep a cached value of priority at a given height and return current priority by only assuming these in chain inputs are aging.
8aa1ae2
@morcos @luke-jr
Add consistency check for on the fly priority calculations
98ef483
@luke-jr
QA: Add test for priority via getrawmempool
2d72888
@luke-jr
QA: Enable testing priority via getblocktemplate as well
cc260ed
@luke-jr
QA: Extend txn_priority test to check across a reorganisation
6704f5b
@luke-jr
Bugfix: Correct off-by-one errors in getrawmempool startingpriority a… 
…nd currentpriority

- Since the transaction arrives after block N, its starting priority is that for block N+1.
- The current priority is likewise as considered for mining the next block.
92c18a4
@luke-jr
Bugfix: rpc-tests/txn_priority: When connecting disconnected nodes, t… 
…heir mempools may not sync, so only sync blocks
fab562b
@luke-jr
CTxMemPool::check: Use height+1 for priority comparison, since height… 
… is not guaranteed to work
ae93a95
@fanquake
Member

fanquake commented Jan 12, 2017

Closing this due to inactivity.

@fanquake fanquake closed this Jan 12, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment