I get a lot of spurious messages like this in the log:
```
2019-08-31T18:07:53Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592633 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:09:40Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592634 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:09:40Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592634 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:09:40Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592634 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:09:40Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592634 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:09:40Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592634 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:10:28Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592635 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:10:28Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592635 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:10:28Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592635 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:10:28Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592635 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:10:28Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592635 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:11:01Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:11:01Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:11:01Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:11:01Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:11:01Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
```
also
```
2019-08-31T18:19:47Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70015, blocks=592636, peer=0
2019-08-31T18:19:47Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:19:47Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70015, blocks=592636, peer=1
2019-08-31T18:19:48Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
2019-08-31T18:19:48Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70015, blocks=592636, peer=2
2019-08-31T18:19:49Z Synchronizing blockheaders, height: 592636 (~100.00%)
```
This log message was introduced in #15615 by @jonasschnelli..
From what I understand, it's supposed to only be shown once per 2000 blocks, not multiple times for the same block.


}
                
                
                
            }
        } else { 
            assert(setBlockIndexCandidates.count(pindex) == 0);
        }
        
        std::pair<std::multimap<CBlockIndex*,CBlockIndex*>::iterator,std::multimap<CBlockIndex*,CBlockIndex*>::iterator> rangeUnlinked = m_blockman.m_blocks_unlinked.equal_range(pindex->pprev);
        bool foundInUnlinked = false;
        while (rangeUnlinked.first != rangeUnlinked.second) {
            assert(rangeUnlinked.first->first == pindex->pprev);
            if (rangeUnlinked.first->second == pindex) {
                foundInUnlinked = true;
                break;
            }
            rangeUnlinked.first++;
        }
        if (pindex->pprev && (pindex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA) && pindexFirstNeverProcessed != nullptr && pindexFirstInvalid == nullptr) {
            
            assert(foundInUnlinked);
        }
        if (!(pindex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA)) assert(!foundInUnlinked); 
        if (pindexFirstMissing == nullptr) assert(!foundInUnlinked); 
        if (pindex->pprev && (pindex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA) && pindexFirstNeverProcessed == nullptr && pindexFirstMissing != nullptr) {
            
            assert(fHavePruned);