From: "\ Jorge Timón" <jtimonmv@gmail•com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Blocking uneconomical UTXO creation
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 18:08:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABOyFfo32xMSvxJdtuWNeCF+kRxita_bR06pbaoN1=AgPHU+eg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0gsrd2W3ODfQRSc2k5V7GotJ0vzEAxcAjnaMtDHZ9_JA@mail.gmail.com>
Well, my initial idea was that nothing was really needed too.
But if something must be done, I dislike very much the "ban
micropayments" approach. I was just offering other solutions that I
consider much better, but if nothing is done I won't be pushing for
those alternative solutions (to a problem that we may not even have).
On 3/11/13, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net> wrote:
> Why does demurrage even still come up? The base rules of Bitcoin will
> not be changing in such a fundamental way.
>
> With regards to trying to minimize the size of the UTXO set, this
> again feels like a solution in search of a problem. Even with SD
> abusing micropayments as messages, it's only a few hundred megabytes
> today. That fits in RAM, let alone disk. If one day people do get
> concerned about the working set size, miners can independently set
> their own policies for what they confirm, for instance maybe they just
> bump the priority of any transaction that has fewer outputs than
> inputs. An IsStandard() rule now that tries to ban micropayments will
> just risk hurting interesting applications for no real benefit. It's
> like trying to anticipate and fix problems we might face in 2020.
>
> There are lots of less invasive changes for improving scalability,
> like making transaction validation multi-threaded in every case,
> transmitting merkle blocks instead of full blocks, moving blocking
> disk IO off the main loop so nodes don't go unresponsive when somebody
> downloads the chain from them, and finishing the payment protocol work
> so there's less incentive to replicate the SD "transactions as
> messages" design.
>
--
Jorge Timón
http://freico.in/
http://archive.ripple-project.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-11 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-10 4:31 Peter Todd
2013-03-11 11:01 ` Jorge Timón
2013-03-11 15:36 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-03-11 16:45 ` Jorge Timón
2013-03-11 16:46 ` Jorge Timón
2013-03-11 16:54 ` Mike Hearn
2013-03-11 17:08 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2013-03-11 18:17 ` Benjamin Lindner
2013-03-11 18:59 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-03-11 18:59 ` Jorge Timón
2013-03-11 19:08 ` Tadas Varanavičius
2013-03-11 22:19 ` Mike Hearn
2013-03-11 22:25 ` Tadas Varanavičius
2013-03-11 22:39 ` Mike Hearn
2013-03-11 23:26 ` Tadas Varanavičius
2013-03-11 17:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-03-11 20:08 ` Rune Kjær Svendsen
2013-03-11 20:36 ` Michael Gronager
2013-03-11 21:01 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-11 21:15 ` Michael Gronager
2013-03-12 7:49 ` Peter Todd
2013-03-13 5:31 ` Stephen Pair
2013-03-13 9:20 ` Jorge Timón
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='CABOyFfo32xMSvxJdtuWNeCF+kRxita_bR06pbaoN1=AgPHU+eg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jtimonmv@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
/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