Justin Starry

> Thanks for totally screwing my future rebase of https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/pull/25839 tho. 😘 Oh dang, I forgot to follow up on that. Let's definitely get yours in first. This restructure isn't...

Sorry @steveluscher, I'd like to get this in first. Feel free to squash the commits in your nonce pr to avoid resolving merge conflicts for each one

FYI this feature was activated a few days ago in epoch 532 on mainnet-beta

Once the feature gate code is cleaned up it will be closed

Thanks @teymour-aldridge this is a good start! It'd be great if this was added to the docs :)

I think this solution is better than what I proposed in https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/issues/34807 and this issue can replace that one if we agree this is a better approach.

Yeah taking both locks is probably too risky.. How about we first reserve as much as cost as we need in qos and then keep track of how much of...

Merge blocked on https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/pull/34823

I'd be in favor of a change that stores the `fee_structure.lamports_per_signature` in the blockhash queue and nonce data. It would require a feature gate but it would allow us to...

Never mind, `Consumer::check_fee_payer_unlocked` calls `Bank::get_lamports_per_signature` but it doesn't actually use it. I'll leave this clean up to @tao-stones since he's already working on cleaning up `calculate_fee`