From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YwyoR-0005w2-Ow for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 25 May 2015 20:17:27 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of yahoo.com designates 67.195.87.187 as permitted sender) client-ip=67.195.87.187; envelope-from=rdwnj@yahoo.com; helo=nm47-vm9.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com; Received: from nm47-vm9.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com ([67.195.87.187]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YwyoQ-0001GZ-8a for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 25 May 2015 20:17:27 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm47.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 May 2015 20:17:20 -0000 Received: from [98.137.12.191] by nm47.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 May 2015 20:14:19 -0000 Received: from [98.137.12.227] by tm12.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 May 2015 20:14:19 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1035.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 May 2015 20:14:19 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 953515.59247.bm@omp1035.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-YMail-OSG: lOMqbGwVM1nly8UpqIBM9hvLq.iIiS6wSdmzQzcSnZXGpSjdvSZcp6P74hijvHE xVNXndQGHHYEVU3SwZiWSSqt6IDQr1v3nvXDxuY.nxjy_7KNJwDJGmgMVDEs.oUYpJQWgUoiD13W MGiW3_Zl_clbzI5OZnr0RBmFg2JS1RKUNfPOCdDZ7CJo9KxG2j4bFkiCccZVpU5dK2Y.8sYf32Ph Vk5warHof7kqZDZ4NudJXazSD3iVuE0wyK9if3nmD05D766OrJywWx6hfkpl8mxF4BZIWWkUsKAF WCAf447tYlXuNwk5Prrgppw8TtBcOl_DgKcaKp2D7NlJYfP.8LM5D02x75Kx6b36Zx_PJcRvT3gT xMFk44okdGfY_FrC9SGYavm3JHSJ28zRePXDJDyi8e.G6q97F6aVdyHQZxismqfhxZOLL3GpLGzb f_67UoWFSCAhEP_cNVF8tGaBRYZGMyf5v1gqEG7eACU8Nic5lm2SdlZI_sJVdQUP9cuE4XTXtehV .P90- Received: by 98.137.12.50; Mon, 25 May 2015 20:14:19 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 20:14:17 +0000 (UTC) From: Ron To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" Message-ID: <542308084.933798.1432584857775.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_933797_1204143679.1432584857773" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HK_RANDOM_REPLYTO Reply-To username looks random 1.0 HK_RANDOM_FROM From username looks random -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.6 HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM Envelope sender username looks random 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rdwnj[at]yahoo.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [67.195.87.187 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1YwyoQ-0001GZ-8a Subject: [Bitcoin-development] alternatives to the 20MB block limit, measure first! X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ron List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 20:17:27 -0000 ------=_Part_933797_1204143679.1432584857773 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all, With all the discussion about the Block size limit, I thought it would be i= nteresting to measure, in some sense, the average Tx size.=C2=A0 Then given= a fixed average block period (Bp) of 10 minutes (i.e 600 seconds), all one= needs to do to estimate an average block size is ask the question: what av= erage transaction rate (tps) do you want? So for tps ~ 10 (Tx/sec) and an average transaction size (avgTxSz) of 612 B= ytes (last ten blocks up to block 357998 (2:05pm EDT 5/25/2015) we have a b= lock size of 612 * 10 * 600 =3D 3,672,000 Bytes Alternatively, given an avgTxSz ~612 and maxBl =3D 1,000,000 we have (maxBl= / avgBlSz) / Bp is the actual current max tps, which is ~2.72 tps. The avgBlSz for the 10 blocks up to block # 357999 is ~ 576 Bytes, so the c= urrent possible tps is ~2.89 and the maxBL for a tps =3D 10 is 3,456,000 by= tes. So I think one should state one's assumed tps and a measured or presumed av= gTxSz before saying what a maxBl should be. So for a maxBl ~20,000,000 Byte= s and a current avgTxSz ~600 Bytes, the tps ~55.5 FWIW Ron (aka old c coder) ------=_Part_933797_1204143679.1432584857773 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello all,
With all the discussion about the Block size limit,= I thought it would be interesting to measure, in some sense, the average T= x size.  Then given a fixed average block period (Bp) of 10 minutes (i= .e 600 seconds), all one needs to do to estimate an average block size is a= sk the question: what average transaction rate (tps) do you want?

So for tps ~ 10 (Tx/sec) and an = average transaction size (avgTxSz) of 612 Bytes (last ten blocks up to bloc= k 357998 (2:05pm EDT 5/25/2015) we have a block size of 612 * 10 * 600 =3D = 3,672,000 Bytes

Alternat= ively, given an avgTxSz ~612 and maxBl =3D 1,000,000 we have (maxBl / avgBl= Sz) / Bp is the actual current max tps, which is ~2.72 tps.

The avgBlSz for the 10 blocks up to blo= ck # 357999 is ~ 576 Bytes, so the current possible tps is ~2.89 and the ma= xBL for a tps =3D 10 is 3,456,000 bytes.

So I think one should state one's assumed tps and a measur= ed or presumed avgTxSz before saying what a maxBl should be. So for a maxBl= ~20,000,000 Bytes and a current avgTxSz ~600 Bytes, the tps ~55.5 FWIW

Ron (aka old c coder)

------=_Part_933797_1204143679.1432584857773--