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 35CE094E for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:10:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from ankaa.uberspace.de (ankaa.uberspace.de [185.26.156.54]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9677102 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6127 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2016 14:10:00 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.178.20?) (127.0.0.1) by ankaa.uberspace.de with SMTP; 21 Oct 2016 14:10:00 -0000 To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <358752cc-48f6-eef8-ae9a-e17a0651ed52@murch.one> <1aa41a90-2cc6-36c8-d9c5-67d52befabbe@mycelium.com> <3b7ff5e7-9803-27ab-af26-df2c743f53d0@murch.one> From: Murch Message-ID: <4cee655d-cd31-a8dd-48a6-e7fe72ae223a@murch.one> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:09:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3b7ff5e7-9803-27ab-af26-df2c743f53d0@murch.one> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 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] On-going work: Coin Selection Simulation X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:10:05 -0000 Hello Daniel and others, A recent version of my Coin Selection Simulator is now available on my GitHub repository: https://github.com/Xekyo/CoinSelectionSimulator Please feel free to write an email or open an issue on GitHub, if you happen to find errors, have questions about using the simulator, or (especially!) have interesting results running the simulation on your own data. Note that a log and a csv-table with results are posted to the console by the simulator, so you might want to pipe that somewhere. ;) There are probably some inefficiency issues, and user experience improvement opportunities left as I'm currently focusing on my thesis, yet, I've come to the conclusion that some people might be interested in taking a look nonetheless even though I haven't gotten around to polishing the code repository up yet. Regards Murch Am 23.09.2016 um 11:11 schrieb Murch via bitcoin-dev: > Hi Daniel, > > Thank you for your mail. > My simulation of the Mycelium coin selection does add small change > outputs to the fee, but I did get your boundary wrong. > Instead of the 5460, I dropped at the dust boundary which calculates to > 4440 in my simulation. Therefore, I think that the results in the table > might be slightly too big, but likely indicative of the actual Mycelium > behavior. > I've corrected the boundary in my simulation now and will update my > simulation results before Scaling Bitcoin. Thank you very much for your > correction. > > Sorry, the simulation code has not been published yet, I plan to do that > around Scaling Bitcoin or after I turn in my thesis (End of October). I > will let you know when I do. > > It is my understanding that Mycelium doesn't create small change outputs > but rather hardly ever spends them when received. > > You're probably more familiar with the code base (I think you work for > Mycelium?), so please correct me when I'm wrong: > Mycelium appears to select UTXO in a FIFO approach, but, after the > selection, prunes by removing the smallest selected UTXO until the > excess beyond the spending target is minimized. This post-selection step > seems the likely reason for Mycelium's small UTXO build-up. (Bitcoin > Core intermittenly used post-selection pruning also, and apparently this > did cause a similar increase in UTXO set size then.) > > I assume that this will also cause Mycelium to create a huge transaction > every once in a while when this build-up is enough to fund a transaction > without a bigger UTXO being selected. > > As to how it may be mitigated: BreadWallet uses a very similar FIFO > approach, but doesn't prune. My simulation result indicates that their > average UTXO set is much smaller. This has the downside that users could > be spammed with small transaction outputs that they then would pay for > spending. > A balanced approach between these two approaches might be that instead > of pruning all small inputs, a few of the small inputs could be allowed > to be selected to slowly drain low-value UTXO out of the wallet by > spending them over time. In order to avoid the privacy issues such as > e.g. always spending the oldest UTXO, it would for example be possible > to implement this as a 75% probability to prune an unnecessary output. > > Regards > Murch > > Am 22.09.2016 um 11:33 schrieb Daniel Weigl via bitcoin-dev: >> Hi, >> >> Is your simulation code available somewhere? >> >> I was just wondering why mycelium generates a very big UTXO set for <1000sat, because change outputs will never be smaller than >> 5460sat (=TransactionUtils.MINIMUM_OUTPUT_VALUE). If the change would be lower, it simply is skipped and added to the miner fee: >> -> https://github.com/mycelium-com/wallet/blob/master/public/bitlib/src/main/java/com/mrd/bitlib/StandardTransactionBuilder.java#L334 >> >> Does your simulation account for that? >> >> It might also be that the small UTXO came from external tx and we never spend them, bec. of pruning/privacy. Not sure how we could optimize that. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> On 2016-09-21 14:58, Murch via bitcoin-dev wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm currently compiling my Master's thesis about Coin Selection and my >>> presentation proposal to Scaling Bitcoin has been accepted. >>> >>> For my thesis, I have analyzed the Coin Selection problem, created a >>> framework to simulate wallet behavior on basis of a sequence of >>> payments, and have re-implemented multiple coin selection strategies of >>> prominent Bitcoin wallets (Bitcoin Core, Mycelium, Breadwallet, and >>> Android Wallet for Bitcoin). >>> >>> As the Scaling Bitcoin site suggests that research should be made >>> available to this mailing list, I would like to invite you to have a >>> look at: >>> >>> http://murch.one/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CoinSelection.pdf >>> >>> The PDF (176 kB) contains a two page description of my on-going work, >>> including preliminary simulation results, and three figures showing the >>> simulated wallets' UTXO compositions at the end of the simulation. >>> >>> I can provide further information as requested, and would welcome any >>> feedback. >>> >>> →→ If anyone has another sequence of incoming and outgoing payment >>> amounts at hand that I could run my simulation on, I'd love to hear >>> about it. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Murch >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> bitcoin-dev mailing list >>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >