📅 Original date posted:2015-11-14
📝 Original message:I agree with the usefulness of at least trying to define a formal set
of criteria.
I'm afraid that with proposals that schedule future increases to the
blocksize consensus maximum or leave it for miners to decide (like
BIP100, BIP101 and BIP103) cannot be evaluated without making
assumptions about the future (or what miners will decide in the
future).
Since limiting resource consumption and mining centralization dynamics
are the reasons to have blocksize consensus maximum in the first
place, I think it would be ideal to have some simulation +
benchmarking software that is able to analyze a given proposal, give
resource consumption benchmark data about average and worst cases, and
also give some kind of metric from "mining centralization dynamics
simulations".
We could start with just a metric for concrete block sizes (for
arbitrary maximum blocksizes testchains see #6382).
Note that this is unrelated to the deployment mechanism, proposed
activation date and other details.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> For instance, a goal could be that no user on the network should wait more
> than an hour to get 3 confirmations on the blockchain so that they can
> actually have useful Bitcoins.
That depends on block space demand on a particular moment in time, the
fee paid by the example user and local relay and mining policies in
the network (and how they treat transactions with the specific form of
the transaction example) and even the network topology.
There's no consensus rule that can guarantee that all transaction from
all users will be included at most 3 blocks after they are relayed.
For starters, any user can create infinite transactions (without fee)
for free while the network will never have infinite computing
resources.
What we have is a fee estimator that observes the chain and can
estimate the market situation to tell you the average number of blocks
for a given transaction with a given feerate. I know that number was
only 14 blocks or so for free (not a single satoshi in fees)
transactions, but that has probably changed with the recent attacks...
Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx…cl2d8
2023-06-07 19:44:47
in reply to nevent1q…5wmr
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Published at
2023-06-07 19:44:47Event JSON
{
"id": "b799d56f45d8418c08f1b5f856361bfc10891c874532ccb25d15fcbe24eff3f7",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686159887,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3a0a71e06daf4df40d34d7d4df38f6afd927082ae4667eeee9d89bbe73cc655b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e494483078b63d034611afa7f2d74a5673bb1471d2e5b05723185ba464618f3c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"c1d3f07ddbb5e8ccdf7e1a71dc707629a884323a62c7d504be5dc931240f61b9"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-11-14\n📝 Original message:I agree with the usefulness of at least trying to define a formal set\nof criteria.\nI'm afraid that with proposals that schedule future increases to the\nblocksize consensus maximum or leave it for miners to decide (like\nBIP100, BIP101 and BIP103) cannot be evaluated without making\nassumptions about the future (or what miners will decide in the\nfuture).\nSince limiting resource consumption and mining centralization dynamics\nare the reasons to have blocksize consensus maximum in the first\nplace, I think it would be ideal to have some simulation +\nbenchmarking software that is able to analyze a given proposal, give\nresource consumption benchmark data about average and worst cases, and\nalso give some kind of metric from \"mining centralization dynamics\nsimulations\".\nWe could start with just a metric for concrete block sizes (for\narbitrary maximum blocksizes testchains see #6382).\nNote that this is unrelated to the deployment mechanism, proposed\nactivation date and other details.\n\nOn Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e For instance, a goal could be that no user on the network should wait more\n\u003e than an hour to get 3 confirmations on the blockchain so that they can\n\u003e actually have useful Bitcoins.\n\nThat depends on block space demand on a particular moment in time, the\nfee paid by the example user and local relay and mining policies in\nthe network (and how they treat transactions with the specific form of\nthe transaction example) and even the network topology.\nThere's no consensus rule that can guarantee that all transaction from\nall users will be included at most 3 blocks after they are relayed.\nFor starters, any user can create infinite transactions (without fee)\nfor free while the network will never have infinite computing\nresources.\nWhat we have is a fee estimator that observes the chain and can\nestimate the market situation to tell you the average number of blocks\nfor a given transaction with a given feerate. I know that number was\nonly 14 blocks or so for free (not a single satoshi in fees)\ntransactions, but that has probably changed with the recent attacks...",
"sig": "930033be2b678741cf3ee2c200c555e88513eef71df7b6c8ce2d619ff4377c60247af744be3b711d5b61098e8ae59b344306853cf8a3d94d44a2cd72696ab7be"
}