From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UyRyQ-0003XH-Cq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from vps7135.xlshosting.net ([178.18.90.41]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UyRyP-0001DB-Gu for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 +0000 Received: by vps7135.xlshosting.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5FAA033CB93; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:28:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:28:39 +0200 From: Pieter Wuille To: John Dillon Message-ID: <20130714192838.GA26941@vps7135.xlshosting.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key: http://sipa.ulyssis.org/pubkey.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com) 0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is CUSTOM_MED -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 1.2 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED ADSP custom_med hit, and not from a mailing list X-Headers-End: 1UyRyP-0001DB-Gu Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reward for P2SH IsStandard() patch. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 -0000 On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 07:05:26PM +0000, John Dillon wrote: > Long-term we should be using P2SH with an inner OP_CHECKSIG for most addresses > as it's a 1 byte savings. Change addresses can have this done first, although > bitcoinj support will help so that satoshidice and similar sites can pay to > P2SH change. As for multisig's P2SH overhead for a 1-of-2 and 2-of-2 and > 3-of-3, is 10%, 8.6% and 6.2% respectively, all pretty minor, especially if you > assume the blocksize limit will be raised. Small comment: the current implementation in the reference client uses a custom script encoder for the UTXO database, which stores every (valid) send-to-pubkey as 33 bytes and every send-to-pubkeyhash or send-to-scripthash as 21 bytes. So for "standard" address payment, there is no storage impact of using P2SH instead. -- Pieter