1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <voisine@gmail.com>) id 1X6Vxl-0005qi-VK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 14 Jul 2014 02:25:58 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.219.50 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.219.50; envelope-from=voisine@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oa0-f50.google.com;
Received: from mail-oa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.219.50])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1X6Vxk-0008BV-RX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 14 Jul 2014 02:25:57 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id g18so3559674oah.23
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.19.196 with SMTP id h4mr15100293obe.20.1405304751206;
Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.169.109 with HTTP; Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <35E6FF51-F9C4-4973-8489-B364E7C27C14@ricmoo.com>
References: <35E6FF51-F9C4-4973-8489-B364E7C27C14@ricmoo.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:25:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CACq0ZD6Mo0uVMM8HU3VrYORQgme7z084B45Cap8GYVwi-xs6vA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>
To: Richard Moore <me@ricmoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(voisine[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1X6Vxk-0008BV-RX
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Self-dependency transaction question...
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 02:25:58 -0000
I believe tx have to be ordered sequentially within a block. Also
since a tx is referenced by it's hash, it's practically impossible to
make a self referential tx.
Aaron Voisine
breadwallet.com
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Richard Moore <me@ricmoo.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'm working on the UTXO database for my Python implementation of bitcoind
> and have found a situation I did not realize was valid, but since it seem=
s
> to be, had a quick question.
>
> If you look at block #546 the 4th transaction's first input uses its own
> block's 3rd transaction as an input.
> https://blockchain.info/block/000000005a4ded781e667e06ceefafb71410b511fe0=
d5adc3e5a27ecbec34ae6
>
> My question is, would the other way be valid, that is, could the 3rd
> transaction of a block, use the 4th transaction from the same block as an
> input? Or are transactions processed strictly top to bottom?
>
> Thanks,
> RicMoo
>
> P.S. If it is valid, another question; what would happen if a transaction
> was self-referencing? I realize it would be very difficult to find one, b=
ut
> if I could find a transaction X whose input was X and had an output Y, wo=
uld
> Y be a new valid utxo, without being a generation transaction input?
>
> .=C2=B7=C2=B4=C2=AF`=C2=B7.=C2=B8=C2=B8.=C2=B7=C2=B4=C2=AF`=C2=B7.=C2=B8=
=C2=B8.=C2=B7=C2=B4=C2=AF`=C2=B7.=C2=B8=C2=B8.=C2=B7=C2=B4=C2=AF`=C2=B7.=C2=
=B8=C2=B8.=C2=B7=C2=B4=C2=AF`=C2=B7.=C2=B8><(((=C2=BA>
>
> Richard Moore ~ Founder
> Genetic Mistakes Software inc.
> phone: (778) 882-6125
> email: ricmoo@geneticmistakes.com
> www: http://GeneticMistakes.com
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
> search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck®
> Code Sight™ - the same software that powers the world's largest code
> search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
|
