From: Jared Lee Richardson <jaredr26@gmail•com>
To: Jacob Eliosoff <jacob.eliosoff@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hypothetical 2 MB hardfork to follow BIP148
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:40:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD1TkXtut2LZdp5Qo9ep2FfMGFFYqdxtobLJgoC7UutyNujKKg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAUaCyjbObcb1mJVmeEDmgzNddQCY3QhrHV3fgNbin-ZyqgfeA@mail.gmail.com>
> Maybe there's some hole in Jorge's logic and scrapping blockmaxsize has quadratic hashing risks, and maybe James' 10KB is too ambitious; but even if so, a simple 1MB tx size limit would clearly do the trick. The broader point is that quadratic hashing is not a compelling reason to keep blockmaxsize post-HF: does someone have a better one?
I think this is exactly the right direction to head. There are
arguments to be made for various maximum sizes... Maybe the limit
could be set to 1mb initially, and at a distant future block
height(years?) automatically drop to 500kb or 100kb? That would give
anyone with existing systems or pre-signed transactions several years
to adjust to the change. Notification could (?possibly?) be done with
a non-default parameter that must be changed to continue to use 100kb
- <1mb transactions, so no one running modern software could claim
they were not informed when that future date hits.
I don't see any real advantages to continuing to support transactions
larger than 100kb excepting the need to update legacy use cases /
already signed transactions.
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Jacob Eliosoff via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Maybe there's some hole in Jorge's logic and scrapping blockmaxsize has
> quadratic hashing risks, and maybe James' 10KB is too ambitious; but even if
> so, a simple 1MB tx size limit would clearly do the trick. The broader
> point is that quadratic hashing is not a compelling reason to keep
> blockmaxsize post-HF: does someone have a better one?
>
>
>
> On May 30, 2017 9:46 PM, "Jean-Paul Kogelman via bitcoin-dev"
> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> That would invalidate any pre-signed transactions that are currently out
>> there. You can't just change the rules out from under people.
>>
>>
>> On May 30, 2017, at 4:50 PM, James MacWhyte via bitcoin-dev
>> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The 1MB classic block size prevents quadratic hashing
>>> problems from being any worse than they are today.
>>>
>>
>> Add a transaction-size limit of, say, 10kb and the quadratic hashing
>> problem is a non-issue. Donezo.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-02 19:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-23 20:23 Luke Dashjr
2017-05-23 23:07 ` Erik Aronesty
2017-05-30 13:27 ` Jorge Timón
2017-05-30 20:10 ` Jacob Eliosoff
2017-05-30 21:24 ` Mark Friedenbach
2017-05-30 22:26 ` Jorge Timón
2017-05-30 23:50 ` James MacWhyte
2017-05-31 1:09 ` Jean-Paul Kogelman
2017-05-31 3:07 ` Jacob Eliosoff
2017-06-02 19:40 ` Jared Lee Richardson [this message]
2017-06-12 16:27 ` Nathan Cook
2017-05-31 1:22 ` Jorge Timón
2017-05-31 4:14 ` Luke Dashjr
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=CAD1TkXtut2LZdp5Qo9ep2FfMGFFYqdxtobLJgoC7UutyNujKKg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jaredr26@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jacob.eliosoff@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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