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 14FFECE4 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 16:27:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (mail-qg0-f44.google.com [209.85.192.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73BD8171 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 16:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgeb1 with SMTP id b1so23747661qge.1 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 08:27:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=GJ5ug0pAqVvqEGwSBbY4268Q/AxlO0nIUwT7GwPOqyU=; b=0VMZ5EzxEezq5HuHzqknFi3xKOi2NnC0Vk2i0oOb2bKiLpiamxzuUV355I24RDBIih UsY3WtkqcK8nto2v+cuXsu32Sgn9BvzCAI3O3maGyXH2aZbQyd8VCB8pivztB7hELq1Y mu8zk6JQhiI5QgychHutKNcSCgyeMKfLNn7t+rNULhbtZDf/uzsFHrV4x+ZgKq7Eag5o afHD+W2mw+t041sPDFf8qrOMWIY7GJbZR4w+dCPBzvEBdZWaEsw0Iev7++TvIwlh8rGs LwxdXo1RqGnZFUw60ADZZhRUD2uMuz1yfZJtdLsYTAYYOyi9Gob8MtnettXO1ns/6k2B aCOw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.250.70 with SMTP id v67mr6288219qhc.43.1449592038374; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 08:27:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.101.112 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 08:27:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:27:18 -0500 Message-ID: From: Akiva Lichtner To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a97e2846f50052665726b X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:33:02 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling by Partitioning X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:27:25 -0000 --001a113a97e2846f50052665726b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello, I am seeking some expert feedback on an idea for scaling Bitcoin. As a brief introduction: I work in the payment industry and I have twenty years' experience in development. I have some experience with process groups and ordering protocols too. I think I understand Satoshi's paper but I admit I have not read the source code. The idea is to run more than one simultaneous chain, each chain defeating double spending on only part of the coin. The coin would be partitioned by radix (or modulus, not sure what to call it.) For example in order to multiply throughput by a factor of ten you could run ten parallel chains, one would work on coin that ends in "0", one on coin that ends in "1", and so on up to "9". The number of chains could increase automatically over time based on the moving average of transaction volume. Blocks would have to contain the number of the partition they belong to, and miners would have to round-robin through partitions so that an attacker would not have an unfair advantage working on just one partition. I don't think there is much impact to miners, but clients would have to send more than one message in order to spend money. Client messages will need to enumerate coin using some sort of compression, to save space. This seems okay to me since often in computing client software does have to break things up in equal parts (e.g. memory pages, file system blocks,) and the client software could hide the details. Best wishes for continued success to the project. Regards, Akiva P.S. I found a funny anagram for SATOSHI NAKAMOTO: "NSA IS OOOK AT MATH" --001a113a97e2846f50052665726b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,

I am seeking some expert feedback on an idea for scaling Bitcoin. As a br= ief introduction: I work in the payment industry and I have twenty years= 9; experience in development. I have some experience with process groups an= d ordering protocols too. I think I understand Satoshi's paper but I ad= mit I have not read the source code.

The idea is to run more t= han one simultaneous chain, each chain defeating double spending on only pa= rt of the coin. The coin would be partitioned by radix (or modulus, not sur= e what to call it.) For example in order to multiply throughput by a factor= of ten you could run ten parallel chains, one would work on coin that ends= in "0", one on coin that ends in "1", and so on up to = "9".

The number of chains could increase automatical= ly over time based on the moving average of transaction volume.

Blocks would have to contain the number of the partition they belong to, = and miners would have to round-robin through partitions so that an attacker= would not have an unfair advantage working on just one partition.

I don't think there is much impact to miners, but = clients would have to send more than one message in order to spend money. C= lient messages will need to enumerate coin using some sort of compression, = to save space. This seems okay to me since often in computing client softwa= re does have to break things up in equal parts (e.g. memory pages, file sys= tem blocks,) and the client software could hide the details.

Best wishes for continued success to the project.
<= /div>

Regards,
Akiva

P.S. I found a fun= ny anagram for SATOSHI NAKAMOTO: "NSA IS OOOK AT MATH"

--001a113a97e2846f50052665726b--