From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
To: Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Reorgs on SigNet - Looking for feedback on approach and parameters
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:24:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <68B066E6-0D96-49F0-88D2-D716E81BFDE8@mattcorallo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFvNmHQmH8S4JFa6xQNbFt0b4PjmqHx5ii6Jd9T5bfSWmPW0KA@mail.gmail.com>
> On Sep 13, 2021, at 05:30, Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Can you explain the motivation for this? From where I sit, as far as I know, I should basically be > a prime example of the target market for public signet - someone developing bitcoin applications > with regular requirements to test those applications with other developers without
>> jumping through hoops to configure software the same across the globe and set up miners.
>> With blocks > being slow and irregular, I’m basically not benefited at all by signet and will
>> stick with testnet3/mainnet testing, which both suck.
>
> On testnet3 you can realistically go days without blocks being found
> (and conversely thousands of blocks can be found in a day), the block
> discovery time variance is huge. Of course this is probabilistically
> possible on mainnet too but the probability of this happening is close
> to zero. Here[0] is an example of 16,000 blocks being found in a day
> on testnet3.
Blocks too fast isn’t generally an issue when waiting for blocks to test, and hooking up a miner is probably less work on testnet3 than creating a multi-party private signet with miners. In any case, you didn’t address the substance of the point - we can do better to make it a good platform for testing…. Why aren’t we?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-13 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-13 12:30 [bitcoin-dev] Reorgs on SigNet - Looking for feedback on approach and parameters Michael Folkson
2021-09-13 16:24 ` Matt Corallo [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-10 13:05 Michael Folkson
2021-09-10 18:24 ` Matt Corallo
2021-09-10 19:00 ` Michael Folkson
2021-09-10 19:22 ` Matt Corallo
2021-09-10 20:00 ` David A. Harding
2021-09-07 16:07 0xB10C
2021-09-07 16:44 ` Jeremy
2021-09-08 7:59 ` Anthony Towns
2021-09-12 14:29 ` vjudeu
2021-09-12 14:54 ` Greg Sanders
2021-09-10 0:50 ` Matt Corallo
2021-09-12 7:53 ` Anthony Towns
2021-09-13 5:33 ` Matt Corallo
2021-09-14 4:56 ` Anthony Towns
2021-09-15 15:24 ` Matt Corallo
2021-10-15 4:41 ` Anthony Towns
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=68B066E6-0D96-49F0-88D2-D716E81BFDE8@mattcorallo.com \
--to=lf-lists@mattcorallo.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=michaelfolkson@gmail.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