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

Extract Decred-specific mempool policy #264

Closed
davecgh opened this issue May 30, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Extract Decred-specific mempool policy #264

davecgh opened this issue May 30, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@davecgh
Copy link
Member

davecgh commented May 30, 2016

Pull request #263 syncs in the upstream mempool policy structure however it does not add the new Decred-specific variables to it. That must be done before the mempool can properly be split out into a separate package.

Also, the code in rpcserver.go is improperly referencing the mempool policy from the block template generation code, so the variable for maxSigOpsPerTx had to be added to it in order to keep the code working. The comment added as part of the PR explains why:

    // NOTE: This is being added while syncing upstream because the code in
    // the RPC server here is referencing the variable even though it most
    // definitely shouldn't be.  It is a policy limit regarding what should
    // be relayed or mined and thus should only apply in the mempool and/or
    // possibly the mining code.
@MiguelMoll
Copy link

Is this issue still valid given #496 refactored mempool into it's own package?

I see rpcserver.go is still referencing maxSigOpsPerTx .

Trying to find something "simple" I can help with. 😉

@davecgh
Copy link
Member Author

davecgh commented Dec 21, 2017

Sorry for the late response. This one slipped by me somehow. It still applies.

@davecgh
Copy link
Member Author

davecgh commented Mar 2, 2018

As it turns out, you are correct that it no longer applies. I was thinking about the priority code which is handled by PR #1110.

@davecgh davecgh closed this as completed Mar 2, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants