Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: CreateTransaction: suggest/enforce fee for big low-priority transactions
by
StevenC
on 01/03/2011, 22:29:21 UTC
Hi, I made some further observations regarding the stalled transactions that started off this discussion (so hopefully this is on-topic) :

Code:
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed 8074fb67ce

ERROR: ConnectInputs() : 8074fb67ce mapTransactions prev not found 864bef9df1
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed 8074fb67ce

ERROR: ConnectInputs() : 8ec51bbaf5 mapTransactions prev not found 8074fb67ce
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed 8ec51bbaf5

ERROR: ConnectInputs() : f9ccaa5e8b mapTransactions prev not found 8ec51bbaf5
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed f9ccaa5e8b

ERROR: ConnectInputs() : 7dddd55332 mapTransactions prev not found f9ccaa5e8b
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed 7dddd55332

ERROR: ConnectInputs() : dafce7d622 mapTransactions prev not found 7dddd55332

I then realised these transactions are being processed sequentially, only one per block:


Any guesses tx dafce7d622... makes block #111261?

I find it very odd that exactly one transaction from this 'dependency chain' is being included into block.  Is this really the expected behaviour?  A mere coincidence?  Or something to be worried about?

My graph of 'dependency chains' I've observed in my debug.log is here:  http://pyro.eu.org/stuff/bitcoin-txqueue.pdf

Update: I think it's okay... in #111261 block, a huge chunk of items from that 'chain' I was looking at, made it into the block.  I guess there's nothing to be worried about.