RFC: Should node Wallet Startup Options Apply to Individual Wallets? #32462

1. 
   ismaelsadeeq commented at 3:42 pm on May 9, 2025: member

   PR #29278 is going to introduces a maxfeerate wallet startup option.

   There was some discussion between between @luke-jr , me, and @murchandamus in a thread #29278 (review)

   This still isn’t a wallet option…

   I don’t understand why you said it is not a wallet option. The OptionsCategory of this startup option is WALLET, and it’s only used in the wallet. Can you please expand on your comment? Thanks.

   I’m also confused by this comment. @luke-jr, could you elaborate on what you are suggesting?

   Something set on each wallet, potentially different for each.

   Luke suggested that the startup option should instead be set individually for each wallet, rather than globally. However, this is not how the current wallet options are implemented wallet options are currently applied globally to all wallets.

   I’m opening this up for general discussion because I find it may be redundant to require setting the same options individually for each wallet. However, I’m curious to hear others’ opinions.

2. maflcko added the label Brainstorming on May 10, 2025
3. maflcko added the label Wallet on May 10, 2025
4. 
   ryanofsky commented at 2:04 pm on May 12, 2025: contributor

   Is idea with the “set on each wallet, potentially different for each” suggestion that the existing -maxtxfee option should remain global, but -maxfeerate should be per-wallet?

   If so, that seems confusing and it would be good to know what rationale would be.

   It seems like just making both global would let them be easier to understand and more convenient to set. Then if there is a use-case for wanting different wallets to have different values, support for that could be added in another PR. If different wallets need different values, it could also make sense (not sure) to store those values in the wallet databases rather than externally so individual wallet configurations are self-contained.

5. 
   ismaelsadeeq commented at 5:18 pm on May 13, 2025: member

   I share the same opinion. I also noticed @murchandamus gave a thumbs up, which I interpret as agreement. Therefore, I’ll resolve the comment in #29278 (review) and close this issue.

   As mentioned, if there’s a use case for wanting different wallets to have different values, support for that can be added in another PR, and the rationale can be documented in this issue for better tracking.

6. ismaelsadeeq closed this on May 13, 2025

   ---

Contributors
ismaelsadeeq ryanofsky

Labels
Brainstorming Wallet