📅 Original date posted:2015-08-09
📝 Original message:On Saturday 8. August 2015 19.05.29 Alex Morcos via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I agree
> There are a lot of difficult technical problems introduced by insufficient
> block space that are best addressed now.
I agree problems for space restrictions should be solved, and the sooner the
better.
What your statement has as a side-effect is that we will run into problems when
the moment of insufficient block space comes *this* year instead of in 5 years.
I can practically guarantee that no proper solutions will be deployed in time
for natural growth of usage to reach always 1Mb full blocks.
Having several more years to make such solutions will be very healthy.
> As well as problems that scale
> will exacerbate like bootstrapping that we should develop solutions for
> first.
Notice that many people here have tried but have been unable to find a relation
between max-blocksize and full node-count.
Also, there are pretty good solutions already, like a bootstrap torrent and
the headers first. In the upcoming release the actual CPU load should also get
better making the actual download much much faster than the 0.9 release.
Or, in other words, these problems have been solved in a large part already,
and more is underway.
I don't expect them to be showstoppers when a the network finally allows bigger
than 1Mb blocks. Natural growth has shown that blocks won't jump in size
significantly in one month anyway. So this scenario still has 6 months or so.
--
Thomas Zander
Thomas Zander [ARCHIVE] /
npub1du…vyg93
2023-06-07 17:45:47
in reply to nevent1q…ph9n
Author Public Key
npub1du3xh5wgds32a5fweqkd9k45kh30wl7kv2kyu8ugz9c2ztdg00tqqvyg93Published at
2023-06-07 17:45:47Event JSON
{
"id": "cdc16571e15531f99fd44b355d70a23e72a06d3a05fc31fda8cca944c437534f",
"pubkey": "6f226bd1c86c22aed12ec82cd2dab4b5e2f77fd662ac4e1f881170a12da87bd6",
"created_at": 1686152747,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"cf6411bfecea99b0c4ea78e985838b5e3fd62429f4968960ffd260356286401f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"41b63cb4cf2998688ef86b5eaa15eb245f7a345d77f6354902460875b841be88",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f3e056e548ecd779cfbea56b1bf9eb9c26afb3780523aa0df2e58f34f4b1faee"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-09\n📝 Original message:On Saturday 8. August 2015 19.05.29 Alex Morcos via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I agree\n\u003e There are a lot of difficult technical problems introduced by insufficient\n\u003e block space that are best addressed now.\n\nI agree problems for space restrictions should be solved, and the sooner the \nbetter.\nWhat your statement has as a side-effect is that we will run into problems when \nthe moment of insufficient block space comes *this* year instead of in 5 years.\n\nI can practically guarantee that no proper solutions will be deployed in time \nfor natural growth of usage to reach always 1Mb full blocks.\nHaving several more years to make such solutions will be very healthy.\n\n\u003e As well as problems that scale\n\u003e will exacerbate like bootstrapping that we should develop solutions for\n\u003e first. \n\nNotice that many people here have tried but have been unable to find a relation \nbetween max-blocksize and full node-count.\n\nAlso, there are pretty good solutions already, like a bootstrap torrent and \nthe headers first. In the upcoming release the actual CPU load should also get \nbetter making the actual download much much faster than the 0.9 release.\n\nOr, in other words, these problems have been solved in a large part already, \nand more is underway.\nI don't expect them to be showstoppers when a the network finally allows bigger \nthan 1Mb blocks. Natural growth has shown that blocks won't jump in size \nsignificantly in one month anyway. So this scenario still has 6 months or so.\n\n-- \nThomas Zander",
"sig": "34d8109fd3c4ce26e226a6f65e1edec06d06bcbd923e114d3d935fa377ea6be1f291c8d87e79afe78e00682834a32493bab4e03546e2b3c66a952cddb02b27fc"
}