From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YrA4j-0005oK-QQ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 19:06:13 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YrA4i-0007NX-Hs for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 19:06:13 +0000 Received: by wgyo15 with SMTP id o15so97542304wgy.2 for ; Sat, 09 May 2015 12:06:06 -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:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=WVAdmXCryZ24DKHZsZo997FNnHbVTu5526dK4l/410c=; b=j8FRP4+BSeDDQ29htg3AdiDyKQBPpM1Wkfk23KXEV+aRJQ0LtJbU6oKKiz74TXRYtx drTTPV2YXVh6XL+RQ24Ujc4qNdDha2pMntV/Uwpzt2uxWbVI+UqUyQRZIT8E26crEZ5Y +CHIICXuZLFyCLUYM4dxg+LX3otHvKhoOoAUgQbwtnhZIlNWM6cuHrFzsHhjoi/Tmkan KYBgHM/3GaULvtI+q0SQ7k7gPFJsORz2NPn0v7f9YUAeup33YLl++mbgKGEmYHfU9a0W fMxQVfOlyIv1g4u2T9L5Enc6H+QlcW3ClH9HwfO9aXDpTg0s5Kr78emYQYu5vVF0rm5S pIZg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnzeORTGXnSxh1hdBFuI8DU/EYfUfga5POcog0OYq8v1ElOR1SMCgSUabsc+2fun/s+QqWL X-Received: by 10.180.74.208 with SMTP id w16mr6660651wiv.31.1431198366521; Sat, 09 May 2015 12:06:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.246.69 with HTTP; Sat, 9 May 2015 12:05:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jim Phillips Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 14:05:36 -0500 Message-ID: To: Andreas Schildbach Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043892173d6fed0515aad64a X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1YrA4i-0007NX-Hs Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A suggestion for reducing the size of the UTXO database X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 19:06:13 -0000 --f46d043892173d6fed0515aad64a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote: > Actually your assumption is wrong. Bitcoin Wallet (and I think most, if > not all, other bitcoinj based wallets) picks UTXO by age, in order to > maximize priority. So it keeps the number of UTXOs low, though not as > low as if it would always pick *all* UTXOs. > > Is it not fair to say though that UTXO database growth is not considered when selecting the UTXOs to use? And that size of transaction is a priority if not the top priority? --f46d043892173d6fed0515aad64a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable --f46d043892173d6fed0515aad64a--