This splits the output comparison for `bitcoin-tx` into two steps:
- First, check for data mismatch, parsing the data as json or hex
depending on the extension of the output file
- Then, check if the literal string matches
For either of these cases give a different error.
This prevents wild goose chases when e.g. a trailing space doesn't match
exactly, and makes sure that both test output and examples are valid
data of the purported format.
Recent discussion (in IRC meetings, and e.g. #8989) has shown a
preference for the default confirm target for smartfees to be 6 instead
of 2, to avoid overpaying fees for questionable gain.
6 is also a compromise between the GUI's pre-#8989 value of 25 and the
bitcoind `-txconfirmtarget` default of 2. These were unified in #8989,
but this has made the (overly expensive) default of 2 as GUI default.
```
getmemoryinfo
Returns an object containing information about memory usage.
Result:
{
"locked": { (json object) Information about locked memory manager
"used": xxxxx, (numeric) Number of bytes used
"free": xxxxx, (numeric) Number of bytes available in current arenas
"total": xxxxxxx, (numeric) Total number of bytes managed
"locked": xxxxxx, (numeric) Amount of bytes that succeeded locking. If this number is smaller than total, locking pages failed at some point and key data could be swapped to disk.
}
}
Examples:
> bitcoin-cli getmemoryinfo
> curl --user myusername --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id":"curltest", "method": "getmemoryinfo", "params": [] }' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
```
Add a pool for locked memory chunks, replacing LockedPageManager.
This is something I've been wanting to do for a long time. The current
approach of locking objects where they happen to be on the stack or heap
in-place causes a lot of mlock/munlock system call overhead, slowing
down any handling of keys.
Also locked memory is a limited resource on many operating systems (and
using a lot of it bogs down the system), so the previous approach of
locking every page that may contain any key information (but also other
information) is wasteful.
0334430 Add some missing includes (Pieter Wuille)
4100499 Return shared_ptr<CTransaction> from mempool removes (Pieter Wuille)
51f2783 Make removed and conflicted arguments optional to remove (Pieter Wuille)
f48211b Bypass removeRecursive in removeForReorg (Pieter Wuille)
nMaxInbound might very well be 0 or -1, if the user prefers to keep
a small number of maxconnections.
Note: nMaxInbound of -1 means that the user set maxconnections
to 8 or less, but we still want to keep an additional slot for
the feeler connection.
> This new feature is enabled by default if Bitcoin Core is listening, and a connection to Tor can be made. It can be configured with the -listenonion, -torcontrol and -torpassword settings. To show verbose debugging information, pass -debug=tor.
But it is correct to say that the feature is enabled *regardless* of whether a connection to Tor can be made.
I propose to clarify that so that users can eliminate these in their logs (when `listen=1` and no Tor).
And I think it's okay to clarify about the `listen` option, because on several occasions when I read this before I always assumed `listening` meant `server=1` which cost me a lot of time in troubleshooting.
```
2016-10-24 06:19:22.551029 tor: Error connecting to Tor control socket
2016-10-24 06:19:22.551700 tor: Not connected to Tor control port 127.0.0.1:9051, trying to reconnect
```
### What version of bitcoin-core are you using?
0.12.1
Note that this is not a major issue as, in order for the missing
lock to cause issues, you have to receive a GETBLOCKTXN message
while reindexing, adding a block header via RPC, etc, which results
in either a table rehash or an insert into the bucket which you are
currently looking at.
3154d6e [Qt] use NotifyHeaderTip's height and date for the progress update (Jonas Schnelli)
0a261b6 Use pindexBestHeader instead of setBlockIndexCandidates for NotifyHeaderTip() (Jonas Schnelli)
There were discrepancies between usage of "block chain" and "blockchain", I've changed them to the latter. The reason for this was that Wikipedia when describing this data structure writes "A blockchain — *originally block chain*", so it seemed the more appropriate term.
