RPC getmininginfo error: integer out of range #8402

Just a guess, but I think that the new 'currentblockweight' data that is returned by this endpoint may be causing issues. When I call the endpoint against a recent build from master:

curl --user myrpcuser --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id":"curltest", "method": "getmininginfo", "params": [] }' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
Enter host password for user 'myrpcuser':

{"result":null,"error":{"code":-1,"message":"JSON integer out of range"},"id":"curltest"}

Similarly, "bitcoin-cli getmininginfo" returns:

error code: -1
error message:
JSON integer out of range

An overflow error during generation of JSON instead of parsing? That's odd.

The master branch is regularly built and tested, but is not guaranteed to be completely stable. Tags are created regularly to indicate new official, stable release versions of Bitcoin Core.

I've been unable to reproduce this:

$ curl --user __cookie__ --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id":"curltest", "method": "getmininginfo", "params": [] }' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
Enter host password for user '__cookie__':
{"result":{"blocks":423636,"currentblocksize":0,"currentblockweight":0,"currentblocktx":0,"difficulty":201893210853.059,"errors":"This is a pre-release test build - use at your own risk - do not use for mining or merchant applications","networkhashps":1.506995848235919e+18,"pooledtx":13390,"testnet":false,"chain":"main"},"error":null,"id":"curltest"}

Also I still don't fully understand how this can happen. The error JSON integer out of range is raised in UniValue::get_int() and UniValue::get_int64(), neither of which is called in getmininginfo - as it has no arguments to parse.

The only get_int() that is not part of a specific RPC command its input parsing is the one in JSONErrorReply. I suppose if something inside the call raises a JSONRPCError with an invalid "code" field, this could happen, it would be internally unable to parse its own error value. I don't see where/how this could happen though.

You're right; it wasn't a bug - it was a compatibility issue with my own code. I'll be posting a related trivial documentation fix shortly.