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 2224BE42 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:16:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8222E35F for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id r71so23009501wmd.1 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 06:16:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j8OHIkcFQD2YIN4YAFlFeIu0cO4Fop185c8+g1M1mkE=; b=B48amZ5mPT02o4k8fAg9GMcImcdIDXneRGt2FXMjuK1z1gUD+sTN4UJ1n8nfXj3RfW 1AiTE2CEY9PYcJoC2hRWubn8w6n3OYVxBaWrKvG6sna9tDEXsReTW1pL5HIJwb23XxIQ NqsSz9jMOJSvwM7caUWErNOj7oetTkZlV87NYPJWXBgd2bhtG+BZziybISBDwPC1Z1s6 BaNo1ad9zDPMSDp3s4ZBOEyf05TWESSv5yaHNumro/PQcU7vo6jZFMKAoDnGzDGC/y0N WfpKPFs1c6gvqf3HJKaMkyL0oDv6t9vS+x4In6CtkIGnMVo96rA7QqfhvjTDcxowjZmk pT7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j8OHIkcFQD2YIN4YAFlFeIu0cO4Fop185c8+g1M1mkE=; b=Duvq8HXSzvzrV8wBH9+yVhq3NO5KOz6ZftTRvjF/JbsTJPmPkps01g5JAz93A02kdq aDBCydpRlmGvecBIprLNBwwyXNLlkBoHn987YLmmcMDIfUJ4eM2Hnws4Mew1KefuZRUI 5XXEQcR/QfWazitNiE9cdpmpIL2wKEOax6L4dcTLhuaxJZIMNjb9g1yPGlIUSu7abTnY WJ+7vW7vOKtFHNaiBwnIey30PYIXvjMOV/Yyd+7YBiPcM9SJIhsDCmxQCCGw/2urgYCE bZxBrg2trRGSFOWqgHKGStYfPvYc1KMSmAMzoPjoCDtiHN1ysV0LMj7rGhOjZiJGXruA Gjlw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCv84hKw/4wp+S/XNZQTBww4BqWpRcKfJ+ihsi1bUtsnX+Ax95Y hEHuaV9+XshJglFNVX2tgdLldH9Sb9mFtD17WUtLhQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225ICkRxDOIYXdZ8TiGgxUD9P2ZGkpZtsQvdL06jXfPMlu6vbh8LsHIm/eg0k1qQK3auIXLzEZjCgen8KuTFDqA= X-Received: by 10.80.140.210 with SMTP id r18mr6937581edr.306.1518617809943; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 06:16:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.134.209 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 06:16:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20180212225828.GB8551@fedora-23-dvm> <20180212234225.GA9131@fedora-23-dvm> From: Greg Sanders Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:16:29 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Russell O'Connor" , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Revisiting BIP 125 RBF policy. 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: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:16:52 -0000 --f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Yes. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:19:40PM -0500, Russell O'Connor wrote: >> > Surely CPFP is already computing the package-fee rates of mempool >> > transactions. That is the value we need to compute. >> >> True, maybe we can just reuse the CPFP calculation now. That said, AFAIK >> that's >> only done in the miner code, not the mempool, so that may not be trivial >> to >> actually do. >> > > Do you (or anyone else) know if the package fee rate is considered when > ejecting transactions from the bottom of the mempool when the mempool gets > too large? > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > --f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes.

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin= -dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12= , 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
On Mon, Feb = 12, 2018 at 06:19:40PM -0500, Russell O'Connor wrote:
> Surely CPFP is already computing the package-fee rates of mempool
> transactions.=C2=A0 That is the value we need to compute.

True, maybe we can just reuse the CPFP calculation now. That said, A= FAIK that's
only done in the miner code, not the mempool, so that may not be trivial to=
actually do.

Do you (or anyone e= lse) know if the package fee rate is considered when ejecting transactions = from the bottom of the mempool when the mempool gets too large?

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5--