Re: [Bitcoin-development] Warning: many 0.7 nodes break on large number of tx/block; fork risk

[Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> BDB ran out of locks.
> However, only on some 0.7 nodes. Others, perhaps nodes using different
> flags, managed it.
> We have processed 1mb sized blocks on the testnet.
> Therefore it isn't presently clear why that particular block caused
> lock exhaustion when other larger blocks have not.

Locks are only mostly related to block size, once I heard what was
happening I was unsurprised the max sized test blocks hadn't triggered
it.

> Therefore it is possible that we have a very limited amount of time
until nodes start dying en-masse.

Scaremongering much? Egads.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Michael Gronager <gronager@ceptacle.com> wrote:
> Forks are caused by rejection criteria, hence:
> 1. If you introduce new rejection criteria in an upgrade miners should upgrade _first_.
> 2. If you loosen some rejection criteria miners should upgrade _last_.
> 3. If you keep the same criteria assume 2.

And ... if you aren't aware that you're making a change ???