remain | time checks that an enum or match is written in sorted order | SDK library

I think this gets you pretty close; might just need to adjust the various name columns and drop the extra data (I kept the grouping column).

The main idea is to recursively use pd.json_normalize with pd.concat for all availalable children levels.

EDIT: Put everything into a single function and added section to collapse the name columns like the expected output.

From cppreference's consteval specifier (since C++20):

The consteval specifier declares a function or function template to be an immediate function,
...
An immediate function is a constexpr function, and must satisfy the requirements applicable to constexpr functions or constexpr constructors, as the case may be.

And if we go to cppreference's constexpr specifier (since C++11):

A constexpr function must satisfy the following requirements:
...
A constexpr constructor whose function body is not =delete; must satisfy the following additional requirements:
...
for the constructor of a class or struct, every base class sub-object and every non-variant non-static data member must be initialized.

However, as @user17732522 accurately pointed out in a comment below, this last requirement applies only until C++20.

So I would say i doesn't need to be initialized in this case (Clang/MSVC are correct, gcc is wrong).

Turns out IOPCIDevice::_CopyDeviceMemoryWithIndex was indeed the function needed to implement this (but the fact that it's private is still an inconvenient).

Bellow is some sample code showing how this could be implemented (the code uses MyDriver for the driver class name and MyDriverUserClient for the user client).

Relevant sections from MyDriver.cpp implementation:

You can use concat_arrays macro for it:

Imo, it's a bug in Paramiko. It does not handle correctly absence of server-sig-algs extension on the server side.

Try disabling rsa-sha2-* on Paramiko side altogether:

Attention:

Here is an inspiring idea which is not fully satisfy OP's requirement (e.g., ID.new and number order) but I think it worth to be recoreded here.

You can turn DT into long format by melt firstly. Then to shift value with the step -nrow(DT) in order to do the minus operation, i.e. NAME1 - NAME2, NAME2 - NAME3, NAME3 - NAME1.

Previous answers may help as background:
c++, std::atomic, what is std::memory_order and how to use them?
https://bartoszmilewski.com/2008/12/01/c-atomics-and-memory-ordering/

Firstly the system you describe is known as a Single Producer - Single Consumer queue. You can always look at the boost version of this container to compare. I often will examine boost code, even when I work in situations where boost is not allowed. This is because examining and understanding a stable solution will give you insights into problems you may encounter (why did they do it that way? Oh, I see it - etc). Given your design, and having written many similar containers I will say that your design has to be careful about distinguishing empty from full. If you use a classic {begin,end} pair, you hit the problem that due to wrapping

{begin, begin+size} == {begin, begin} == empty

Okay, so back synchronisation issue.

Given that the order only effects reording, the use of release in Publish seems a textbook use of the flag. Nothing will read the value until the size of the container is incremented, so you don't care if the orders of writes of the value itself happen in a random order, you only care that the value must be fully written before the count is increased. So I would concur, you are correctly using the flag in the Publish function.
I did question whether the "release" was required in the Consume, but if you are moving out of the queue, and those moves are side-effecting, it may be required. I would say that if you are after raw speed, then it may be worth making a second version, that is specialised for trivial objects, that uses relaxed order for incrementing the head.

You might also consider inplace new/delete as you push/pop. Whilst most moves will leave an object in an empty state, the standard only requires that it is left in a valid state after a move. explicitly deleting the object after the move may save you from obscure bugs later.

You could argue that the two atomic loads in consume could be memory_order_consume. This relaxes the constraints to say "I don't care what order they are loaded, as long as they are both loaded by the time they are used". Although I doubt in practice it produces any gain. I am also nervous about this suggestion because when I look at the boost version it is remarkably close to what you have. https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_66_0/boost/lockfree/spsc_queue.hpp

Just quick speedups:

1. You can omit math.sqrt()
2. Create dictionary of colors instead of a list (that way you don't have to search for the index each iteration)
3. use min() instead of sorted()

I haven't tested your full setup with electrumx and the ethereum stuff present in your docker-compose file, but regarding your problem, the following steps worked properly, and I think it will do as well in your complete setup.

I ran with docker a bitcoin node based in the ulamlabs/bitcoind-custom-regtest:latest image you provided: