public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ricardo Filipe <ricardojdfilipe@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:30:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALC81CNidPEgLpTVCRWqXYn0UpSCU-nuo5S85NSQ4UCce=n4EA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACq0ZD7-qr4BCdnqOSXLYv-i58vAXWGcQ1oLsrbHoNFMeiNTtg@mail.gmail.com>

I've been following the discussion of the block size limit and IMO it
is clear that any constant block size limit is, as many have said
before, just kicking the can down the road.
My problem with the dynamic lower limit solution based on past blocks
is that it doesn't account for usage spikes. I would like to propose
another dynamic lower limit scheme:
Let the block size limit be a function of the number of current
transactions in the mempool. This way, bitcoin usage regulates the
block size limit.

I'm sorry i don't have the knowledge of the code base or time to make
simulations on this kind of approach, but nevertheless I would like to
leave it here for discussion or foster other ideas.

cheers



  reply	other threads:[~2015-06-01 11:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-08  7:20 [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function Matt Whitlock
2015-05-08 10:15 ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-08 10:30 ` Clément Elbaz
2015-05-08 12:32   ` Joel Joonatan Kaartinen
2015-05-08 12:48     ` Matt Whitlock
2015-05-08 13:24       ` Matt Whitlock
2015-05-08 12:48     ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-08 16:51     ` Peter Todd
2015-05-08 22:36       ` Joel Joonatan Kaartinen
2015-05-09 18:30         ` Peter Todd
2015-05-08 15:57 ` Alex Mizrahi
2015-05-08 16:55 ` Bryan Bishop
2015-05-08 20:33 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-05-08 22:43   ` Aaron Voisine
2015-05-08 22:45     ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-05-08 23:15       ` Aaron Voisine
2015-05-08 23:58         ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-05-09  3:36   ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-05-09 11:58     ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-09 13:49       ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-10 17:36     ` Owen Gunden
2015-05-10 18:10       ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-05-10 21:21     ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-10 21:33       ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-05-10 21:56       ` Rob Golding
2015-05-13 10:43     ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-16  0:22       ` Rusty Russell
2015-05-16 11:09         ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-18  1:42           ` Rusty Russell
2015-05-19  8:59             ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-10 21:48   ` Thomas Voegtlin
2015-05-10 22:31     ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-05-10 23:11       ` Thomas Voegtlin
2015-05-28 15:53 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-28 17:05   ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-28 17:19     ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-28 17:34       ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-28 18:23         ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-29 11:26           ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-29 11:42             ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-29 11:57               ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-29 12:39                 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-29 14:00                   ` insecurity
2015-05-29 14:15                     ` Braun Brelin
2015-05-29 14:09                   ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-29 14:20                     ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-29 14:22                       ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-29 14:21                     ` Mike Hearn
2015-05-29 14:22                     ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-29 16:39                       ` [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB stepfunction Raystonn .
2015-05-29 18:28                         ` Tier Nolan
2015-05-29 17:53                   ` [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function Admin Istrator
2015-05-30  9:03                     ` Aaron Voisine
2015-06-01 11:30                       ` Ricardo Filipe [this message]
2015-06-01 11:46                         ` Marcel Jamin
2015-05-29 18:47                   ` Bryan Cheng
2015-05-30  1:36                     ` Cameron Garnham
2015-05-28 17:39       ` [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB stepfunction Raystonn .
2015-05-28 17:59         ` Pieter Wuille
2015-05-28 18:21           ` Gavin Andresen
2015-05-28 17:50       ` [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function Peter Todd
2015-05-28 17:14   ` Thomas Voegtlin
2015-05-28 17:34   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-05-29 17:45   ` Aaron Voisine
2015-05-08 14:57 Steven Pine
2015-05-09  0:13 Raystonn
     [not found] <CAAjy6kDdB8uODpPcmS8h4eap8fke7Y2y773NHJZja8tB5mPk4Q@mail.gmail.com>
2015-05-28 16:30 ` Steven Pine
     [not found]   ` <CABsx9T03aNRC5DRbR06nNtsiBdJAcQsGAHvbCOe3pnuRpdvq5w@mail.gmail.com>
2015-05-28 18:25     ` Steven Pine
2015-05-28 18:31       ` Gavin Andresen

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='CALC81CNidPEgLpTVCRWqXYn0UpSCU-nuo5S85NSQ4UCce=n4EA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ricardojdfilipe@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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