AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 17 Bitcoin

Add delays when reading past payment events for stats (#3288)

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Bastien Teinturier

81/100 · Strong
Add delays when reading past payment events for stats (#3288)

When we restart, we load past payments events into the peer stats
tracker to inform our scoring algorithm. We read them in chunks,
but it can be quite expensive in terms of bandwidth. Since this is
low priority and there are a lot of DB reads already happening when
starting up, we add a large initial delay and a small-ish chunk delay.

With the default values, all past events should be loaded ~20 minutes
after starting up, and the first run of the scoring algorithm happens
1 hour after starting up, so this should work well.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit is a performance and reliability improvement, not a security fix. It adds configurable delays when a restarted Eclair node reloads past payment events into its peer statistics tracker. Previously these database reads happened immediately and in rapid succession, which could strain the database during startup. Now the first batch waits 10 minutes and subsequent batches wait 10 seconds between reads. There is no indication this change addresses a vulnerability or is security-critical.

Recommended action

No security action required. Treat as a normal reliability/performance improvement. Review default delay values for operational suitability if running large nodes.

Security signals we found

01

No security-relevant signals in commit message or diff

02

Change is purely operational/performance tuning

03

No new attack surface introduced

04

No CVE, advisory, or vendor security disclosure referenced

Risk score

Why this scored 17/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 2/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 1/15
Confidence 9/10
Evidence quality 5/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.