Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adapt hard-coded version number #969

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2019

Conversation

cornelius
Copy link
Member

Change the minimum required client version for the fee estimator file
to 0.1.0. This fixes the bug which prevents loading of the file.

Doing this as a minimal change for now. Could be implemented in a
cleaner way in the future.

Fixes #968

Change the minimum required client version for the fee estimator file
to 0.1.0. This fixes the bug which prevents loading of the file.

Doing this as a minimal change for now. Could be implemented in a
cleaner way in the future.

Fixes #968

Signed-off-by: Cornelius Schumacher <cornelius@thirdhash.com>
@cornelius cornelius added the bug A problem of existing functionality label Apr 12, 2019
Copy link
Member

@Gnappuraz Gnappuraz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK 4a419e7

@@ -900,7 +900,7 @@ bool CBlockPolicyEstimator::Write(CAutoFile& fileout) const
{
try {
LOCK(cs_feeEstimator);
fileout << 149900; // version required to read: 0.14.99 or later
fileout << 10000; // version required to read: 0.1.0 or later
Copy link
Member

@thothd thothd Apr 12, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why do we even need to write the version number here? for which purpose is it?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a legacy from Bitcoin Core, because they apparently changed the format with version 0.14.99, so they wrote the version to detect that. We, of course, only have one version now, so this could be done cleaner, but I'm not sure we want to clean this up now. There are other places in the code which could be cleaned up regarding the version handling as well.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok do we already have an issue for it, for cleaning the codebase from hardcoded version numbers or so?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, I don't think we have an issue yet. We removed most hard-coded version numbers by now, I believe. But there is logic left which does not make too much sense without them.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is an issue now: #980

Copy link
Member

@thothd thothd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK 4a419e7

@@ -935,9 +935,9 @@ bool CBlockPolicyEstimator::Read(CAutoFile& filein)
unsigned int nFileBestSeenHeight;
filein >> nFileBestSeenHeight;

if (nVersionRequired < 149900) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this check make sense for us in the first place?

We only have one format, the one we'll start with.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@cornelius
Copy link
Member Author

I'll merge this to fix the bug now. I would suggest to revisit the versioning handling later from a bit more general point of view. I think it would make sense to do that after the 0.17 merge. I'll create an issue for later.

@cornelius cornelius merged commit 6ecbe2d into dtr-org:master Apr 15, 2019
@cornelius cornelius deleted the fix-version-fee-estimation branch April 15, 2019 08:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug A problem of existing functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CBlockPolicyEstimator::Read() potential error
4 participants