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 5F6B39B for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:59:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C31DFE2 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:59:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicne3 with SMTP id ne3so211110189wic.1 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:59:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=IOlfLjW2irrBQKDL/SBxummIepsz+c+01MDDOVOzsm0=; b=QqObjs82AJG3WQl7TcODb2MjmtMQDyg3EGl31bCpB5Rx3tkMlrZXEUr81s/mll0U1F 4KEBWxDC9NGvtxZhiCa3zymZNC/5g+GRMhxjA+855Iyq0a+RtfM1bSYxBapWu9+eHDiR pAkAZIrTUvSVM3xo59FdxdPHASRu0FxXm+tOT5Gss6MIJm+obe9TNrBpNRDs/v+PEZLU EGNNZfLD4R6aKDW/OhBMSjNeVn8VXISc8UtDWg/ILP4x++ilDV399cTtPaioiKBKyavL P0+pDH5xMW97GSfQzFsFxiBWVYfGXAH/pXIbA18aFG3lWFFDOQaZfsjOrjauQrr8REQU s4Pw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmfdGl20NtyvfeSLPGOzWdqkvo40Gckvubs32oBhVCpEIb1eJuIUz8286nN7lT5TI9c5T3N MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.120.198 with SMTP id le6mr65933230wjb.133.1439373547471; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:59:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:59:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:59:07 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Thomas Zander Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: [bitcoin-dev] A summary list of all concerns related to not rising the block size 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: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:59:09 -0000 I believe all concerns I've read can be classified in the following groups: > 1) Potential indirect consequence of rising fees. - Lowest fee transactions (currently free transactions) will become more unreliable. - People will migrate to competing systems (PoW altcoins) with lower fees. > 2) Software problem independent of a concrete block size that needs to > be solved anyway, often specific to Bitcoin Core (ie other > implementations, say libbitcoin may not necessarily share these > problems). - Bitcoin Core's mempool is unbounded in size and can make the program crash by using too much memory. - There's no good way to increase the fee of a transaction that is taking too long to be mined without the "double spending" transaction with the higher fee being blocked by most nodes which follow Bitcoin Core's default policy for conflicting spends replacements (aka "first seen" replacement policy). I have started with the 3 concerns that I read more often, but please suggest more concerns for these categories and suggest other categories if you think there's more.