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 221A3B59 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:24:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pg0-f45.google.com (mail-pg0-f45.google.com [74.125.83.45]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CE64226 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:24:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 141so26741354pgd.1 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:24:15 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=UNIrTQZDQ6i1KOKMkx2OrZTgshQMkwzikhfuUpDkxng=; b=hLh1BXSHj4lr1nsXv2UCy0xFiq1ezKvU77szdJAbeAxfYbDoKBdRqpB7keT8wGtRxJ NWCyrPZiycck85+Yukvybjr2IYrn+R0Hd+8BK13rqd7SQi+C11wEc54DUCEJnBDrx8k8 xwNBDtAYWKvhCfZa/bvTQC0r7fkaTXl3rKyLV1vtHNUi9FRLTY0H7YQ1LogZ3GfFwkwS A/4/jcnFhXy5b+KD+7Hfji7i0srbiR99wktdiNpKKr5YBaxg8fuHyPZDQB/2xTEyCRrw tE1+dx8IVyhob7AnmnGCfGc4y7xr7qEQKhNWhnn6OsH4c4ROUXPXkWeVOc5/aB2heb1n HgVg== 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; bh=UNIrTQZDQ6i1KOKMkx2OrZTgshQMkwzikhfuUpDkxng=; b=sW1dTC1+TpqD6jBNwEC9kqfuerRrHIp4vvcLVlW1lQNRfYJwGAf0SgtL3lD59CedKi pOcGINIrXUpJP+ufTbSpVnCeeU8Xq8+okX7xaHldTsjbY5cxO60NYkEAtrYkUtITLfJb lkpc/Rp7lhLH8ZK1jYzhUhN4ZrRov/FXPThEBXFAw3QluXw8YmgAhkeyQDY9ioXk6Fy+ wEAjvYvoL84I7lJ9PSJ9s9SzsgNGUp1anurO0WDGqD3GJc7tklWH5yu2SMk9e0UfL2rw CeMrjaDYy32uNj/2CfH34ItMBBEffqhyuNU9mpm5u4Kidk7G41yJ/LDBGF72P1wO3VF0 Mlpg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H13TxdKOH4tAdPx6iNkcgp3qtzXa1i13iaI3RJ1s55/IL/wnaQtmjZpettJxa8TUHyK0rAwNSJdqdq/zg== X-Received: by 10.98.198.78 with SMTP id m75mr11064352pfg.160.1489677854841; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:24:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.170.76 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:24:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Alphonse Pace Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:24:14 -0500 Message-ID: To: Erik Aronesty , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0a2b3e5e2955054adaa70a X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Quadratic hashing solution for a post-segwit hard fork 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: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:24:16 -0000 --94eb2c0a2b3e5e2955054adaa70a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This unnecessarily complicates transaction selection for miners by introducing a second (and possibly third if I understand your proposal correctly) dimension to try to optimize. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_packing_problem Segwit already solves this exact issue by replacing block size with block weight, so I fail to see how this proposal would make any improvements without introducing significant complications. =E2=80=8B --94eb2c0a2b3e5e2955054adaa70a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This unnecessarily complicates transaction selection = for miners by introducing a second (and possibly third if I understand your= proposal correctly) dimension to try to optimize.

See: =C2=A0h= ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_packing_problem

Segwit already solves this exact issue by replacing block size with = block weight, so I fail to see how this proposal would make any improvement= s without introducing significant complications.

<= br>

=E2=80=8B
--94eb2c0a2b3e5e2955054adaa70a--