From: Zac Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail•com>
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] OP_RETURN inside TapScript
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 02:12:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ4-pECnAebQGN2=22ifGga9rtO2svdxY1bX96_VEW-wpjEpWw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vmZt7irtItdhrsha-cHM0-HgzhCQ6GlWdJXr6mKzEHXmoNz5ypuQLR9eKsltreHb0O2kMfcr_VRkZ1hmoJ9RAp5DaMZorhG1JsRSclhin6s=@protonmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1486 bytes --]
Hi ZmnSCPxj,
Any benefits of my proposal depend on my presumption that using a standard
transaction for storing data must be inefficient. Presumably a transaction
takes up significantly more on-chain space than the data it carries within
its OP_RETURN. Therefore, not requiring a standard transaction for data
storage should be more efficient. Facilitating data storage within some
specialized, more space-efficient data structure at marginally lower fee
per payload-byte should enable reducing the footprint of storing data
on-chain.
In case storing data through OP_RETURN embedded within a transaction is
optimal in terms of on-chain footprint then my proposal doesn’t seem useful.
Zac
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 01:05, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail•com> wrote:
> Good morning Zac,
>
> > Reducing the footprint of storing data on-chain might better be achieved
> by *supporting* it.
> >
> > Currently storing data is wasteful because it is embedded inside an
> OP_RETURN within a transaction structure. As an alternative, by supporting
> storing of raw data without creating a transaction, waste can be reduced.
>
> If the data is not embedded inside a transaction, how would I be able to
> pay a miner to include the data on the blockchain?
>
> I need a transaction in order to pay a miner anyway, so why not just embed
> it into the same transaction I am using to pay the miner?
> (i.e. the current design)
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2688 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-25 1:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-24 9:02 vjudeu
2022-02-24 10:08 ` Ruben Somsen
2022-02-24 13:27 ` vjudeu
2022-02-24 14:01 ` Ruben Somsen
2022-02-24 21:40 ` Zac Greenwood
2022-02-25 0:04 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-02-25 1:12 ` Zac Greenwood [this message]
2022-02-25 3:19 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-02-25 7:15 ` Zac Greenwood
2022-02-25 12:48 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-02-25 13:53 ` Zac Greenwood
2022-03-16 18:21 ` Peter Todd
2022-03-19 18:32 ` vjudeu
2022-03-21 11:00 ` Kostas Karasavvas
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='CAJ4-pECnAebQGN2=22ifGga9rtO2svdxY1bX96_VEW-wpjEpWw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=zachgrw@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=ZmnSCPxj@protonmail$(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