Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Eclair does not detect that bitcoind is reindexing and not ready yet #737

Closed
sstone opened this issue Oct 17, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

Eclair does not detect that bitcoind is reindexing and not ready yet #737

sstone opened this issue Oct 17, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@sstone
Copy link
Member

sstone commented Oct 17, 2018

When eclair starts, it checks that it can connect to a Bitcoin Core node, and that this node is "ready" to be used (fully synced). But we don't detect that Bitcoin Core is reindexing which will interfere with our ability to detect that funding transactions are confirmed for example (see #734).

Reported by @Flekoun

@pshep
Copy link

pshep commented Mar 13, 2019

Further to this, Eclair should continue to attempt RPC connections on start-up until told otherwise.
At the moment, on machine boot where Bitcoin Core and Eclair are started at the same time, Eclair fails to connect to Bitcoin simply because it started first and fails on it first and only attempt.

@dscotese
Copy link
Contributor

I agree. It throws an error in several conditions that really only call for one or more of:

  1. Getting the user to do something.
  2. Waiting for something to get finished.

Instead of an error, eclair could create an information dialog that updates on what it's doing and a few troubleshooting tips - Waiting for RPC to come available ("Is your Bitcoin client started?") or waiting for indexing to be completed ("Are you connected to the Internet?"). This way the significant time spent during initialization could be skipped. Right now, it seems the only choice is to close and then start eclair again once the conditions have been corrected.

@araspitzu
Copy link
Contributor

Is this still an issue after #1138 ?

@sstone
Copy link
Member Author

sstone commented Nov 8, 2019

No , it seems that #1138 did fix it (no new reports here or on gitter).

@sstone sstone closed this as completed Nov 8, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants