From: Luv Khemani <luvb@hotmail•com>
To: "bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Miners are struggling with blocks far smaller than 750KB blocks and resorting to SPV mining
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:42:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BLU172-W10F7A109C917CD56E7DF4DC2790@phx.gbl> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2496 bytes --]
Hi all,
I previously mentioned in a post that i believe that technically nodes are capable of handling blocks an order of magnitude larger than the current blocksize limit, the only missing thing was an incentive to run them. I have been monitoring the blockchain for the past couple of weeks and am seeing that even miners who have all the incentives are for whatever reason struggling to download and validate much smaller blocks.
The data actually paints a very grim picture of the current bandwidth/validating capacity of the global mining network.
See the following empty blocks mined despite a non-trivial elapsed time from the previous block just from the past couple of days alone (Data from insight.bitpay.com):
EmptyBlock /Time since previous block/ Size of previous block(bytes)/Mined by====================================================370165 29s 720784 Antpool370160 31s 50129 BTCChinaPool370076 49s 469988 F2Pool370059 34s 110994 Antpool370057 73s 131603 Antpool
We have preceding blocks as small as 50KB with 30s passing and the miner continues to mine empty blocks via SPV mining.
The most glaring case is Block 370057 where despite 73s elapsing and the preceding block being a mere 131KB, the miner is unable to download/validate fast enough to include transactions in his block. Unless ofcourse the miner is mining empty blocks on purpose, which does not make sense as all of these pools do mine blocks with transactions when the elapsed time is greater.
This is a cause for great concern, because if miners are SPV mining for a whole minute for <750KB blocks, at 8MB blocks, the network will just fall apart as a significant portion of the hashing power SPV mines throughout. All a single malicious miner has to do is mine an invalid block on purpose, let these pools SPV mine on top of them while it mines a valid block free of their competition. Yes, these pools deserve to lose money in that event, but the impact of reorgs and many block orphans for anyone not running a full node could be disastrous, especially more so in the XT world where Mike wants everyone to be running SPV nodes. I simply don't see the XT fork having any chance of surviving if SPV nodes are unreliable.
And if these pools go out of business, it will lead to even more mining centralization which is already too centralized today.
Can anyone representing these pools comment on why this is happening? Are these pools on Matt's relay network?
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3080 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2015-08-17 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-17 8:42 Luv Khemani [this message]
2015-08-17 9:15 ` jl2012
2015-08-17 11:18 ` Luv Khemani
2015-08-19 14:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-08-20 14:27 ` Timo Hanke
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=BLU172-W10F7A109C917CD56E7DF4DC2790@phx.gbl \
--to=luvb@hotmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(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