This makes the rpcs a bit more stateless by falling back to their own default max fee instead of the global maxTxFee.
A follow up pull request will move -maxtxfee
to the wallet.
See also related discussions:
This makes the rpcs a bit more stateless by falling back to their own default max fee instead of the global maxTxFee.
A follow up pull request will move -maxtxfee
to the wallet.
See also related discussions:
sendrawtransaction
and testmempoolaccept
RPCs, which now ignore the -maxtxfee
setting.
utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15620/commits/fa96d7642178b5472b7aa76de9c8b86e7b9cde54. Verified this replaces the only usages of maxTxFee
global in rpc code.
0$ git grep maxTxFee | grep rpc
1
2src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp: const CAmount highfee{allowhighfees ? 0 : ::maxTxFee};
3src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp: CAmount max_raw_tx_fee = ::maxTxFee;
How about bumpfee
?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/93623eea71e7159e367b1b1888418099a5307983/src/wallet/feebumper.cpp#L161-L166
😮 space in L162
38@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
39
40 #include <univalue.h>
41
42+constexpr static CAmount DEFAULT_MAX_RAW_TX_FEE{COIN / 10};
DEFAULT_TRANSACTION_MAXFEE
in validation.h, isn’t a new constant confusing?
Suggest a comment here. Something like:
0/** High fee for sendrawtransaction and testmempoolaccept.
1 * By default, transaction with a fee higher than this will be rejected by
2 * sendrawtransaction and testmempoolaccept. This can be overriden with the
3 * maxfeerate argument.
4 * */
promag was worried that there are two constants where one would theoretically be sufficient
Happy to change the name if there is a better one, though.
Misinterpreted the goal sorry, IMO could have the title Uncouple non-wallet rpcs from maxTxFee global
.
Agree with adding release notes.
0@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
1+Updated RPCs
2+------------
3+
4+* The `sendrawtransaction` and `testmempoolaccept` previouly accepted an
In commit “doc: Add release notes for 15620” (faadaae4795038d77936f36483f1410cd92b3238)
s/previouly accepted/RPC methods previously accepted/
In commit “doc: Add release notes for 15620” (faadaae):
This is a nice, detailed description, but I think it would be nice to have a sentence at the beginning summarizing the whole paragraph, like “The -maxtxfee
setting no longer has any effect on non-wallet RPCs. […]”
Oops. I’d already written a branch for this too.
One comment inline, otherwise utACK fa4230b8a708ad9b848c97a5142da804afc43a4b.
The above reference was a mistake.
utACK fa1ad20.