This was an undocumented issue with v0.7 ("bug").
And the term v0.7 is being misused here. It really is a pre v0.8 bug, right? i.e., it has existed since day one ... a configuration setting for BDB that has been that way since v0.3 at least, if I read correctly.
Since when was this bug in software? So how long did the testnet have time to discover it?
See above. It was a scenario (a transaction requiring 10,000 locks, or about 5,000 inputs) that hadn't been tested (again, from what conversations I've seen on it).
Thanks.
Still, if it is that old I wonder how well scenarios with really large scale user base and amount of daily transactions is tested. As some people prophecises about global use. But wouldn't such day also mean millions to billions users and thus very large amount transactions per block... I have to look into this myself when I have time...