Transaction

d2ec2dfd04e362c148c3ab8250f5bd3288817c2b5f90c46c2c57e74db75d062b
Timestamp (utc)
2024-03-26 16:39:29
Fee Paid
0.00000010 BSV
(
0.00941754 BSV
-
0.00941744 BSV
)
Fee Rate
10.71 sat/KB
Version
1
Confirmations
93,243
Size Stats
933 B

2 Outputs

Total Output:
0.00941744 BSV
  • j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM©<div class="post">I found that SSE2 only added a slight 2% speedup, which didn't seem worth the incompatibility. &nbsp;I was trying to take the safer option.<br/><br/>It doesn't look to me like Crypto++ could be deciding whether to use SSE2 at runtime. &nbsp;There's one place where it detects SSE2 for deciding some block count parameter, but the SSE2 stuff is all #ifdef at compile time and I can't see how that would switch at runtime. &nbsp;Maybe I'm not looking in the right place.<br/><br/>Should we enable SSE2 in all the makefiles? &nbsp;It seems like we must in case someone compiles with 64-bit.<br/><br/>I will recompile the 64-bit part of the Linux 0.3.8 release.</div> text/html
    https://whatsonchain.com/tx/d2ec2dfd04e362c148c3ab8250f5bd3288817c2b5f90c46c2c57e74db75d062b