| commit | 9c833f471c14a4438515b6318dbbc5370e8ef7a0 | |
| author | Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com> | |
| Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:05:20 +0000 (28 10:05 +0200) | ||
| committer | Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com> | |
| Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:06:00 +0000 (28 10:06 +0200) | ||
| tree | ea318517e74ab984cc696a991570ef8e002b780a | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | 745bbdc189b29cd42eb93b9b00fb2cf7ab6f49b5 | commitdiff |
| parent | 6af49dddeaeec7f134e86d6f8cf839c55870b7ab | commitdiff |
Merge #11145: Fix rounding bug in calculation of minimum change
6af49dd Output a bit more information for fee calculation report. (Alex Morcos)
a54c7b9 Fix rounding errors in calculation of minimum change size (Alex Morcos)
Pull request description:
Thanks to @juscamarena for reporting this.
Please backport to 0.15.
There was a potential rounding error where the fee for the change added to the fee for the original tx could be less than the fee for the tx including change.
This is fixed in the first commit. The second commit adds one more snippet of information in the fee calculation report. I actually realized that there is more information that would be nice to report, but we can add that post 0.15.
An open question is whether we should be returning failure if the test in line 2885 is hit or just resetting pick_new_inputs and continuing. Originally I made it a failure to avoid any possible infinite loops. But the case hit here is an example of where that logic possibly backfired.
Tree-SHA512: efe049781acc1f6a8ad429a689359ac6f7b7c44cdfc9578a866dff4a2f6596e8de474a89d25c704f31ef4f8c89af770e98b75ef06c25419d5a6dfc87247bf274
6af49dd Output a bit more information for fee calculation report. (Alex Morcos)
a54c7b9 Fix rounding errors in calculation of minimum change size (Alex Morcos)
Pull request description:
Thanks to @juscamarena for reporting this.
Please backport to 0.15.
There was a potential rounding error where the fee for the change added to the fee for the original tx could be less than the fee for the tx including change.
This is fixed in the first commit. The second commit adds one more snippet of information in the fee calculation report. I actually realized that there is more information that would be nice to report, but we can add that post 0.15.
An open question is whether we should be returning failure if the test in line 2885 is hit or just resetting pick_new_inputs and continuing. Originally I made it a failure to avoid any possible infinite loops. But the case hit here is an example of where that logic possibly backfired.
Tree-SHA512: efe049781acc1f6a8ad429a689359ac6f7b7c44cdfc9578a866dff4a2f6596e8de474a89d25c704f31ef4f8c89af770e98b75ef06c25419d5a6dfc87247bf274
| src/wallet/wallet.cpp | diff1 | diff2 | blobhistory |