From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 32 vs 64-bit timestamp fields
Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 17:40:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3Ja7ZAh65yJvH+juPkOF2-qxSxHKz+Zp_5hH6Hw9yyZw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130509111247.GA18521@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
2038 issues only apply to use of signed timestamps, I thought we treat
this field as unsigned? Is it really a big deal?
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 10:42:44PM -0400, Peter Todd wrote:
>> Ah, shoot, I just realized we both got missed Pieter's point entirely:
>> he means to change the meaning of the header timestamp to be relative
>> time passed since the last block...
>
> No, though that's also a possibility, but a backward-incompatible one.
>
> What I mean is have a well-defined 64-bit timestamp for each block, but
> only put the lowest 32 bit in the header. Under the condition:
>
> * There is never a gap of more than 136 years between two blocks.
>
> The actual 64-bit timestamp can be deterministically derived from the
> header, by prefixing it with the lowest 32-bit value that does not
> cause the result to violate the
> at-least-above-the-median-of-the-previous-11-blocks rule.
>
> --
> Pieter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-09 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-08 23:39 Addy Yeow
2013-05-08 23:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-08 23:44 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-09 1:00 ` John Dillon
2013-05-09 1:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-09 1:13 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-05-09 1:27 ` John Dillon
2013-05-09 1:57 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-09 2:33 ` John Dillon
2013-05-09 2:42 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-09 11:12 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-05-09 15:40 ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2013-05-09 15:43 ` Jeff Garzik
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=CANEZrP3Ja7ZAh65yJvH+juPkOF2-qxSxHKz+Zp_5hH6Hw9yyZw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pieter.wuille@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