Skip to content

fix(data): remove 363736, a descendant of invalid 363731 - #157

Merged
0xB10C merged 1 commit into
bitcoin-data:masterfrom
deadmanoz:2026-09-remove-363736
Sep 30, 2026
Merged

0xB10C merged 1 commit into
bitcoin-data:masterfrom
deadmanoz:2026-09-remove-363736

Conversation

@deadmanoz

@deadmanoz deadmanoz commented Sep 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

363736 is the last of the five blocks built on BIP66-invalid 363731 in the 4 July 2015 fork. bitcoin-data/invalid-blocks#28 admitted all five under prev_block_invalid, with their complete blocks (363736's record), so this removes the hash-only row that #155 left in place until invalid-blocks covered descendants (bitcoin-data/invalid-blocks#23).

Nothing else traces to an invalid block. Checked against invalid-blocks at ccb6428, no other row is a record there and no row's header or known parent descends from one; the seven rows invalid-blocks lists as reported but not established stay. Rows whose parent is unknown cannot be checked this way: the 264 hash-only rows with no recorded parent, and the six headers ci/check-with-bitcoind.py reports as building on unknown blocks, the same six as on master.

Testing

Before and after: one row gone, the other 3,928 unchanged and in order. ci/sanity-check.py: 3,663 headers, 1,387 block files.

363736 is the fifth block built on 363731 in the 4 July 2015 BIP66
fork. bitcoin-data/invalid-blocks records it under prev_block_invalid
since PR bitcoin-data#28 (ccb6428), together with its complete block and the four
blocks between it and 363731. bitcoin-data#155 left this hash-only row in place
until invalid-blocks covered descendants of invalid blocks.
@deadmanoz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I think the CI failure was just transient..

@0xB10C

0xB10C commented Sep 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Thanks! didn't do much checking on this one, but trust it to be correct to remove it.

@0xB10C
0xB10C merged commit 5bc84c8 into bitcoin-data:master Sep 30, 2026
2 of 3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants