chainparams: Bump assumed chain params by maflcko · Pull Request #17002 · bitcoin/bitcoin

maflcko · 2019-09-30T20:00:21Z

As every year, reviewers get extra point when their node is running:

assumevalid=0
checkpoints=0
on non-x86_64 hardware

See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-process.md#before-every-major-and-minor-release for the process.

src/chainparams.cpp

doc/release-process.md

src/chainparams.cpp

maflcko · 2019-10-01T11:35:12Z

Took the ChainTxData from the interval that has the assumed valid block as the last block, as requested by @Sjors and @fanquake

laanwj · 2019-10-01T12:36:39Z

ACK fa3a733

Checked on ARM32 (with assumevalid and checkpoints enabled, unfortunately)

mainnet chainTxData matches

{
  "time": 1569926786,
  "txcount": 460596047,
  …
  "txrate": 3.77848885073875
}

getblockchaininfo w/ mainnet mMinimumChainWork, work is clearly ahead

{
  "chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000008ea99c8688b9290267a49f8",
}
consensus.nMinimumChainWork = uint256S("0x000000000000000000000000000000000000000008ea3cf107ae0dec57f03fe8");

mainnet defaultAssumeValid matches expected

cli getblockhash 597379
00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf

consensus.defaultAssumeValid = uint256S("0x00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf"); // 597379

Block 597379 is 8 blocks back at this time. It should be deep enough by the time 0.19.0 is actually released,

fanquake

ACK fa3a733 - checked the mainnet values. I have notes on reviewing assumevalid updates in core-review.

src/bitcoin-cli getchaintxstats 4096 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf
{
  "time": 1569926786,
  "txcount": 460596047,
  "window_final_block_hash": "00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf",
  "window_final_block_height": 597379,
  "window_block_count": 4096,
  "window_tx_count": 8610103,
  "window_interval": 2278716,
  "txrate": 3.77848885073875
}

src/bitcoin-cli getblock 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf
{
  "hash": "00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf",
  "confirmations": 8,
  "strippedsize": 925201,
  "size": 1217775,
  "weight": 3993378,
  "height": 597379,
  "version": 536870912,
  "versionHex": "20000000",
  "merkleroot": "e92ac24aaef4aa1ece52cc41e975bfc83cb1f1fe93923bdb7a6bff824c50b084",
  "tx": [ <snip> ],
  "time": 1569926786,
  "mediantime": 1569922918,
  "nonce": 919954964,
  "bits": "17160f24",
  "difficulty": 12759819404408.79,
  "chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000008ea3cf107ae0dec57f03fe8",
  "nTx": 2590,
  "previousblockhash": "00000000000000000002fc5679f64f7fe636318ade80bb75f4978d0c75658eb0",
  "nextblockhash": "000000000000000000061b82466f5aef92d169f044f2ac38660ab402fe9d1de4"

Show signature

Signature:

bitcoin/bitcoin#17002

maflcko · 2019-10-01T13:04:50Z

Would be nice to get an ACK on the datadir size and maybe one ACK for testnet as well.

Sjors · 2019-10-01T13:41:04Z

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

ACK fa3a7331160d1a460b1c15fca1810e98070d629c for mainnet on macOS 10.14.6.

bitcoin-cli getchaintxstats 4096 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf
{
  "time": 1569926786,
  "txcount": 460596047,
  "window_final_block_hash": "00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf",
  "window_final_block_height": 597379,
  "window_block_count": 4096,
  "window_tx_count": 8610103,
  "window_interval": 2278716,
  "txrate": 3.77848885073875
}

bitcoin-cli getblockheader 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf{
  "mediantime": 1569922918,
  "chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000008ea3cf107ae0dec57f03fe8",
}

du -sh *
257G	blocks
3,5G	chainstate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE7ZvfetalXiMuhFJCV/+b28wwEAkFAl2TVu4ACgkQV/+b28ww
EAl06A/8CGlB5cQ1AYGReWEVMAZAyw8JmMoVXbsRKfQ47R9FVaU6+/81tAKO9Rwj
HVt6cbr2H9gv6WB4mIMrwCOymqxOmpu2UNoYMQhBAXBJfqe8bessEMyWvlHb0OUm
/xKJWi1XH9Gv7CmnZ5eP1Bu189jxfFGc2qWBdwYX31PiKzjtHA42zSD6zBIMILEJ
bKfTqMMqDA057Vqz/4i6hfFyKyjqxbIXNeZU0+R/cRfOSpa5NOzqMBwas5sIWOqP
zsmScUmQ5DrsH5Bl8WeEM26XqPXIJvke957UlOktbTXm4G5vKdfA0RlL1hkh3IPr
OnejUyksdHeKhJjGVkr0Y7RUADVTlyFPmNiW048chxk20XuTm3zRxRLUchs+Rf9Y
R8AwacLprjprZiRzPdQcovSbni5hIyuAaHjoJJ8TfQy1+ZfJRqVG+653U6yc6Wp+
IwYEgrR7zABNm8Rwv6vn3wcrMJzxbMiQ8KzTt3yfl6eXOgKlHlsw9rdJbC8eYdJC
16tR+QItczEwRvHNcpUDzTQznj8Z/O/z418Rv9j3lV4L992t1h4GYrj7Ltg0rYyJ
3iNtQ5R0CkQYC3eomsBnsGI/XyyHtNVKDhGvIfuNK9HsqXkKRBQWCaxqQuVG9+Ha
6KA2hYd9WF9sKaaNEERPLDaILHKUmcSk6deW8WBYuJwWPeW5/1U=
=GsQC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I didn't run IBD from scratch on macOS. I just spun up an Orange Pi for armv7 for bonus points, but that'll take a while.

jamesob · 2019-10-01T14:42:12Z

ACK fa3a733

Verifying new mainnet assumevalid value (00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf):

$ cli getblock 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf

{
  "hash": "00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf",
  "confirmations": 22,
  "strippedsize": 925201,
  "size": 1217775,
  "weight": 3993378,
  "height": 597379,
  "version": 536870912,
  "versionHex": "20000000",
  "merkleroot": "e92ac24aaef4aa1ece52cc41e975bfc83cb1f1fe93923bdb7a6bff824c50b084",
  "tx": [
     ...
  ],
  "time": 1569926786,
  "mediantime": 1569922918,
  "nonce": 919954964,
  "bits": "17160f24",
  "difficulty": 12759819404408.79,
  "chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000008ea3cf107ae0dec57f03fe8",
  "nTx": 2590,
  "previousblockhash": "00000000000000000002fc5679f64f7fe636318ade80bb75f4978d0c75658eb0",
  "nextblockhash": "000000000000000000061b82466f5aef92d169f044f2ac38660ab402fe9d1de4"
}

Verifying new mainnet chainTxData value:

$ cli getchaintxstats 4096 00000000000000000005f8920febd3925f8272a6a71237563d78c2edfdd09ddf

{
  "time": 1569926786,
  "txcount": 460596047,
  ...
  "txrate": 3.77848885073875
}

And new mainnet *_size values:

$ du -hs /data2/bitcoin/blocks

258G    /data2/bitcoin/blocks

$ du -hs /data2/bitcoin/chainstate

3.5G    /data2/bitcoin/chainstate

From a very uncool x86_64 machine synced with a very uncool default configuration.

GPG sig with 2E57129ED7995442

maflcko · 2019-10-01T15:58:25Z

testnet3, anyone?

Sjors · 2019-10-01T17:26:04Z

Chainwork doesn't match for me with testnet3.

$ bitcoin-cli -testnet getchaintxstats 4096 00000000000000b7ab6ce61eb6d571003fbe5fe892da4c9b740c49a07542462d
{
  "time": 1569741320,
  "txcount": 52318009,
  "window_final_block_hash": "00000000000000b7ab6ce61eb6d571003fbe5fe892da4c9b740c49a07542462d",
  "window_final_block_height": 1580000,
  "window_block_count": 4096,
  "window_tx_count": 443460,
  "window_interval": 2923265,
  "txrate": 0.1517002392872353
}
$ bitcoin-cli -testnet getblockheader 00000000000000b7ab6ce61eb6d571003fbe5fe892da4c9b740c49a07542462d
{
      "chainwork": "00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000012b233ad65161453b4e",
}

du -hs *
 30G	blocks
1,2G	chainstate

maflcko · 2019-10-01T17:51:17Z

The chainwork is for the best block (not for a past block). The total work can never decrease, but a specific block might be reorged out on testnet

maflcko · 2019-10-01T17:56:59Z

So you could check that the chainwork I put in is more than the chainwork of the assumed valid testnet block, but also not more than the chainwork of your current testnet chain tip.

Sjors · 2019-10-01T19:41:51Z

0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000012b2a... < 0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000012b3a... and close enough, so ACK. Though it's easier to check this if you do use the same block.

maflcko · 2019-10-01T19:50:44Z

so ACK. Though it's easier to check this if you do use the same block.

Makes sense as this is only for testnet, so the exact value doesn't matter a lot anyway.

fa3a733 chainparams: Bump assumed chain params (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: As every year, reviewers get extra point when their node is running: * `assumevalid=0` * `checkpoints=0` * on non-x86_64 hardware See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-process.md#before-every-major-and-minor-release for the process. ACKs for top commit: laanwj: ACK fa3a733 Sjors: ACK fa3a733 for mainnet on macOS 10.14.6. jamesob: ACK fa3a733 fanquake: ACK fa3a733 - checked the mainnet values. I have notes on reviewing `assumevalid` updates in [core-review](https://github.com/fanquake/core-review/blob/master/update-assumevalid.md). Tree-SHA512: fc545ba0a7056908040b47076b393d028c1c022967c25a2074752f76f0386ef099a64445da6125117a04418bd7eb0655121bfc94e6f60b7bc2666947491b5228

Sjors · 2019-10-23T14:19:10Z

My 32 bit ARM Orange Pi Ubuntu Bionic with Armbian Linux 4.19.62-sunxi just succesfully reached block 597380; only took two weeks and a bunch of handholding. I used assumevalid=0 and checkpoints=0. I get the same results as in my macOS ACK.

laanwj mentioned this pull request Sep 30, 2019

Release process for 0.19.0 #16996

Closed

19 tasks

DrahtBot added Docs Validation labels Sep 30, 2019

fanquake added this to the 0.19.0 milestone Sep 30, 2019

fanquake reviewed Oct 1, 2019

View reviewed changes

src/chainparams.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Sjors reviewed Oct 1, 2019

View reviewed changes

doc/release-process.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/chainparams.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

maflcko force-pushed the 1909-bumpAssumedChainParams branch from fa5bc48 to fade57b Compare October 1, 2019 11:27

chainparams: Bump assumed chain params

fa3a733

maflcko force-pushed the 1909-bumpAssumedChainParams branch from fade57b to fa3a733 Compare October 1, 2019 11:33

fanquake approved these changes Oct 1, 2019

View reviewed changes

fanquake added a commit to fanquake/core-review that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2019

Preemptive add latest assumevalid update

ca7a761

bitcoin/bitcoin#17002

fanquake merged commit fa3a733 into bitcoin:master Oct 2, 2019

maflcko deleted the 1909-bumpAssumedChainParams branch October 2, 2019 13:29

Sjors mentioned this pull request Oct 9, 2019

v0.19.0 testing #17079

Closed

bitcoin locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 16, 2021

Conversation

maflcko commented Sep 30, 2019

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

laanwj commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

fanquake left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

Sjors commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

jamesob commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

Sjors commented Oct 1, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

Sjors commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Oct 1, 2019

Uh oh!

Sjors commented Oct 23, 2019

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Sjors commented Oct 1, 2019 •

edited

Loading