From: praxeology_guy <praxeology_guy@protonmail•com>
To: "bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] TXO commitments do not need a soft-fork to be useful
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:26:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <36Wl_TAWzRgoaNizB_2tyZG9i285MWuPhnmO7RE9KbXbOG9mtFOHrbs2J33bby-nO2JDNnsK07fGKOYjjkMdPc1l-OWtuMH3G9CJgCEI0ao=@protonmail.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1426 bytes --]
Peter Todd & Eric Lombrozo,
I also think communicating the UTXO would be increadibly useful. I just made a writeup called "Synchronization Checkpoints" on github. "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9885" This idea also doesn't use commitments.
But... Commitments would be a plus, because then we having all of the miners verifying the UTXO. Below I brainstorm on how to make this happen with my "Synchronization Checkpoints" idea.
I think if there were commitments, such would not be feasible without it being a commitment on the UTXO as it was N blocks in the past rather than the highest block's UTXO set... because just one little fork of height 1 would be a big waste of effort for the miners.
- Miners would put a commitment at the current Checkpoint Block that would be a hash of the full state of the UTXO at the previous Checkpoint Block.
- I'll point out that blocks are like "incremental diffs" to the UTXO state.
I was thinking that say if a miner and other nodes are OK with storing multiple copies/backups of the UTXO state then to make this work with high performance:
1. Maintain a DB table who's only purpose is to sort UTXO.txid concat UTXO.vout.index.
2. Some Wait for no Forks blocks after a CheckPoint Block is made, begin populating a new UTXO Checkpoint File that is a serialized sorted UTXO set.
3. Merkle tree or bittorrent style hash the UTXO Checkpoint File
4. Party!
Cheers,
Praxeology
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1776 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2017-02-28 16:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-28 16:26 praxeology_guy [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-23 1:11 Peter Todd
2017-02-23 3:30 ` Eric Lombrozo
2017-02-23 7:23 ` Peter Todd
2017-05-16 12:15 ` Alex Mizrahi
2017-05-16 12:23 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='36Wl_TAWzRgoaNizB_2tyZG9i285MWuPhnmO7RE9KbXbOG9mtFOHrbs2J33bby-nO2JDNnsK07fGKOYjjkMdPc1l-OWtuMH3G9CJgCEI0ao=@protonmail.com' \
--to=praxeology_guy@protonmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox