-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.7k
doc: Clarify that CheckSequenceLocksAtTip is a validation function #24564
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
The head ref may contain hidden characters: "2203-docVal-\u{1F361}"
Conversation
|
Could say "mempool validation helper functions" if your intent is to convey that these are only used for validating transactions being {,re-}added to the mempool. |
|
An alternative follow-up suggested to use check the sequence locks before including a tx in a template. (#24080 (comment)) As that requires reading the utxo set, I am not sure about the performance impact. So I'll leave it for a follow-up. |
|
Thx, done. |
|
Concept NACK: Block template creation IS mere policy. |
|
Maybe we need a separate word to describe block templates that are consensus invalid? It doesn't seem policy nor consensus, so I picked "validation". |
glozow
left a comment
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.
ACK fa86710
I agree this is clearer.
|
ACK fa86710 - looks fine to me |
…alidation function fa86710 Clarify that CheckSequenceLocksAtTip is a validation function (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: It has been pointed out that a bug in this function can prevent block template creation. ( bitcoin#24080 (comment) ) So it seems that the scope of this function is more than "policy". Rename it back to "validation", to partially revert commit fa4e30b. ACKs for top commit: ajtowns: ACK fa86710 - looks fine to me glozow: ACK fa86710 Tree-SHA512: 2e0df8c70df4cbea857977f140a8616cfa7505e74df66c9c9fbcf184670ce3ce7567183c3f76e6f3fe8ca6de0e065b9babde6352d6cb495e71ea077ddedbc3f4
It has been pointed out that a bug in this function can prevent block template creation. ( #24080 (comment) ) So it seems that the scope of this function is more than "policy". Rename it back to "validation", to partially revert commit fa4e30b.