Bugfix: RPC/Mining: Use pre-segwit sigops and limits, when working with non-segwit GBT clients #10595

1. 
   luke-jr commented at 7:20 am on June 15, 2017: member
2. fanquake added the label Mining on Jun 15, 2017
3. fanquake added the label RPC/REST/ZMQ on Jun 15, 2017
4. 
   sipa commented at 11:31 pm on June 16, 2017: member

   utACK 4292a752c7eb59ef2cbee70b5cd186eedf16d0dc
5. MarcoFalke added the label Needs rebase on Jun 6, 2018
6. luke-jr force-pushed on Oct 15, 2018
7. 
   luke-jr commented at 12:06 pm on October 15, 2018: member

   Rebased. At this point, it might make sense to just drop support for pre-segwit miners, but this fix is simple, so it makes sense to get in (and backportable) first.
8. in test/functional/feature_segwit.py:229 in e36493be9a outdated

   224@@ -225,6 +225,13 @@ def run_test(self):
   225         # Now try calling getblocktemplate() without segwit support.
   226         template = self.nodes[0].getblocktemplate()
   227 
   228+        # Check that we got a pre-Segwit template
   229+        assert(template['sizelimit'] == 1000000)
   

   ---

   ---

   

   jnewbery commented at 1:26 pm on October 15, 2018:

   nit: prefer assert_equal() for asserting equality
9. in test/functional/feature_segwit.py:230 in e36493be9a outdated

   224@@ -225,6 +225,13 @@ def run_test(self):
   225         # Now try calling getblocktemplate() without segwit support.
   226         template = self.nodes[0].getblocktemplate()
   227 
   228+        # Check that we got a pre-Segwit template
   229+        assert(template['sizelimit'] == 1000000)
   230+        assert('weightlimit' not in template)
   

   ---

   ---

   

   jnewbery commented at 1:26 pm on October 15, 2018:

   nit: assert is a statement, not a function. Please remove parens.
10. 
    jnewbery commented at 1:28 pm on October 15, 2018: member

    I agree that we should just drop support for non-segwit miners at this point. Doesn’t seem worth the trouble of making this change.
11. Bugfix: RPC/Mining: Use pre-segwit sigops and limits, when working with non-segwit GBT clients a5464ad126
12. luke-jr force-pushed on Oct 17, 2018
13. DrahtBot removed the label Needs rebase on Oct 20, 2018
14. 
    DrahtBot commented at 9:16 pm on November 26, 2018: member

    The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

    Conflicts

    Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

    • #14811 (Mining: Enforce that segwit option must be set in GBT by jnewbery)

    If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

15. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 12:52 pm on December 21, 2018: member

    This has been “fixed” by

    • #14811 (Mining: Enforce that segwit option must be set in GBT by jnewbery)
16. MarcoFalke closed this on Dec 21, 2018

    ---

17. DrahtBot added the label Needs rebase on Dec 21, 2018
18. 
    DrahtBot commented at 12:56 pm on December 21, 2018: member
19. laanwj removed the label Needs rebase on Oct 24, 2019
20. DrahtBot locked this on Dec 16, 2021

Contributors
luke-jr sipa jnewbery DrahtBot MarcoFalke

Labels
RPC/REST/ZMQ Mining