public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize.io>
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:04:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201303131804.09339.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACh7GpE09hqCPL6rtdC6EZzohM5QHb+0SdFoD8MzPSqf7=6hOA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 5:41:29 PM you wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the need for hard forks. We can get through this
> crisis by mining pool collusion to prevent forking blocks until there is
> widespread adoption of patched clients.

Anything requiring widespread adoption of patched clients *is by definition* a 
hard fork.

> Proposal:
> 
> 1) Patch the pre-0.8 branches to support an increased lock count, whatever
> number is required to make sure that this problem never shows up again at
> the current block size (I defer to Luke-Jr and gmaxwell's numbers on this).

This is a hard fork.

The only way to avoid a hard fork is to apply the existing lock limit to all 
clients forever. That would be fine, except that pre-0.8 clients cannot reorg 
N blocks without dividing that limit by (N * 2) + 1; that leaves us with the 
limit of around 1000 locks per block on average. Each transaction uses at 
least 3 locks on average (many times more). So about 300 transactions per 
block. This is a much smaller limit than the 1 MB we've been assuming is the 
bottleneck so far, and the need to increase it is much more urgent - as Pieter 
noted on IRC, we are probably already using more than that even ignoring DP 
spam. The only reason pre-0.8 clients have survived as well as they have thus 
far is because the blockchain has managed to avoid very deep reorgs.

Luke



  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-03-13 18:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-13 12:56 [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 13:14 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 15:05 ` Peter Todd
2013-03-13 15:18   ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 15:26     ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 16:04       ` Peter Todd
2013-03-13 17:41 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-03-13 17:58   ` Pieter Wuille
2013-03-13 18:27     ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-03-13 18:35       ` slush
2013-03-13 18:38       ` Pieter Wuille
2013-03-13 19:30       ` Gregory Maxwell
     [not found]         ` <16B6728E-4220-4DA6-B740-FA38A7C19CCB@thelibertyportal.com>
2013-03-13 20:24           ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 20:18       ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 18:04   ` Luke-Jr [this message]
2013-03-13 21:06 ` Andy Parkins
2013-03-13 21:14   ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 21:22     ` Roy Badami
2013-03-13 21:27       ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 21:36         ` Roy Badami
2013-03-14  0:18           ` Cameron Garnham
2013-03-15 17:06             ` Benjamin Lindner
2013-03-15 19:23               ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-15 19:52               ` Gregory Maxwell

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=201303131804.09339.luke@dashjr.org \
    --to=luke@dashjr.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=mark@monetize.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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