From: John <csdarkcounter@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [bitcoindev] Transaction Validation Optimization
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:22:44 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c2b1e7a-ffcd-41da-a533-2d9224fc016fn@googlegroups.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1483 bytes --]
Hi everyone,
While analyzing the codebase, I observed what seems to be duplicate
validation steps for transactions that already exist in the mempool when
they appear in new blocks. Specifically, I'm curious if the secondary
validation performed during block acceptance could be safely optimized for
SegWit-verified transactions using their wtxid hashes.(I'm still working on
the source code, and I'm not sure if the source code was validated twice)
I'm particularly seeking clarification on two aspects: First, does the
current implementation indeed perform full re-validation of mempool
transactions during block processing? Second, if such optimization is
theoretically possible, what subtle risks might emerge regarding
transaction propagation timing or node synchronization that a newcomer like
myself might overlook?
I'd be grateful for any insights about historical design decisions in this
area, critical code sections I should study more deeply, or potential
pitfalls in this line of thinking.
Thanks in advance for sharing your expertise,
John
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3c2b1e7a-ffcd-41da-a533-2d9224fc016fn%40googlegroups.com.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3938 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2025-02-19 3:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-18 15:22 John [this message]
2025-02-19 5:47 ` [bitcoindev] Transaction Validation Optimization Eric Voskuil
2025-02-19 18:20 ` Pieter Wuille
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=3c2b1e7a-ffcd-41da-a533-2d9224fc016fn@googlegroups.com \
--to=csdarkcounter@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoindev@googlegroups.com \
/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