From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64F414A7 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:05:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail148101.authsmtp.com (outmail148101.authsmtp.com [62.13.148.101]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEEA6215 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:05:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235]) by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6NG5MHR047432; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:05:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from [25.247.241.57] ([72.143.231.246]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6NG5F2d047820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:05:18 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 From: Peter Todd Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:05:11 +0000 To: slurms@gmx.us, slurms--- via bitcoin-dev , bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Message-ID: <25607701-D3ED-4D0D-A5B3-C02B727671BF@petertodd.org> X-Server-Quench: 9e67d4cf-3154-11e5-b397-002590a15da7 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAEUEkAYAgsB AmMbWlNeUFh7W2M7 bAhPbAFefEhNXhto VE5WRlRXCwQmRRp/ cRtoUE1ycwJOen4+ bUNkWj5SCUJ9IUIu FFNXFGgCeGZhPWUC AkNRcB5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhEy HhM4ODE3eDlSNhEd aAARJlUTRw4tGTIx DysaEDgjVXEIXDlb X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 72.143.231.246/465 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Node Speed Test X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:05:25 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 23 July 2015 10:19:59 GMT-04:00, slurms--- via bitcoin-dev wrote: >This does not support the theory that the network has the available >bandwidth for increased block sizes, as in its current state 37% of >nodes would fail to upload a 20MB block to a single peer in under 20 >seconds (referencing a number quoted by Gavin). If the bar for >suitability is placed at taking only 1% of the block time (6 seconds) >to upload one block to one peer, then 69% of the network fails for 20MB >blocks. For comparison, only 10% fail this metric for 1MB blocks. Note how due to bandwidth being generally asymetric your findings are probably optimistic - you've measured download capacity. On top of that upload is further reduced by the fact that multiple peers at once need to be sent blocks for reliability. Secondly you're measuring a network that isn't under attack - we need significant additional margin to resist attack as performance is consensus-critical. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQE9BAEBCAAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJVsRCj AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lnc47AIAIQbznavjd2Rbqxeq5a3GLqeYoI4BZIQYqfWky+6OQtq yGRKaqPtGuES5y9L0k7efivT385mOl87PWnWMy61xxZ9FJgoS+YHkEx8K4tfgfA2 yLOKzeFSar2ROCcjHYyPWa2XXjRbNmiLzfNuQyIBArg/Ch9//iXUUM+GG0mChF5k nUxLstXgXDNh5H8xkHeLi4lEbt9HFiwcZnT1Tzeo2dvVTujrtyNb/zEhNZScMXDc UOlT8rBLxzHlytKdXt1GNKIq0feTRJNbreBh7/EB4nYTT54CItaaVXul0LdHd5/2 kgKtdbUdeyaRUKrKcvxiuIwclyoOuRQp0DZThsB262o= =tBUM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----