Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reworking the policy estimation code (fee estimates)

[Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1105 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Alex Morcos <morcos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do you think it would make sense to make that 90% number an argument to
> rpc call?  For instance there could be a default (I would use 80%) but then
> you could specify if you required a different certainty.  It wouldn't
> require any code changes and might make it easier for people to build more
> complicated logic on top of it.
>

RE: 80% versus 90% :  I think a default of 80% will get us a lot of "the
fee estimation logic is broken, I want my transactions to confirm quick and
a lot of them aren't confirming for 2 or 3 blocks."

RE: RPC argument:  I'm reluctant to give too many 'knobs' for the RPC
interface. I think the default percentage makes sense as a
command-line/bitcoin.conf option; I can imagine services that want to save
on fees running with -estimatefeethreshold=0.5  (or
-estimatefeethreshold=0.95 if as-fast-as-possible confirmations are
needed). Setting both the number of confirmations and the estimation
threshold on a transaction-by-transaction basis seems like overkill to me.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1507 bytes --]