From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <jim@ergophobia.org>) id 1YrAo4-0007C7-27 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 19:53:04 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YrAo3-0007U4-3D for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 19:53:04 +0000 Received: by widdi4 with SMTP id di4so64626447wid.0 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Sat, 09 May 2015 12:52:57 -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=P19O2bKIoNGWOzxlr8+CXBR6kHAtExbpszmUsNrd7/I=; b=D6vAtHQRHlYT6JbPWwz3eItAtUIj1pf6oNh4v5benNldxha1oOCBqJJRrGTxm/iEE8 Ora8JNqTpQYLG37N6uUnZG9irQI6s8t/e4a3CfsosoVMsrEiuQSOHHEuxAT81iIvkRqb M5OZvC6YgWJcsq24F/6wxhert3A2M3soVvREk6B6+El+Tfhh9Qh7GL1MP3NaZ+I3of9r K/hvK0acxXxdSeCtk3Jw/gkNS8jost1DEEF6zOLVBorS8RQv15VXCGd7CtugRpNd4J79 Kf511TYHbOzs5383bDVL1WxOFtVJZoFX1YkIjZE4ur977dUbfLulRpHM4g1XwFLpFWTE lEXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnzgyBWTWVBhG1Rs9BgfV35OYWZ7bAE8LseCPXXnGxFvLsykedaBzat2gvNA/ChVMOqqujI X-Received: by 10.194.61.133 with SMTP id p5mr7183411wjr.132.1431201177037; Sat, 09 May 2015 12:52:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.246.69 with HTTP; Sat, 9 May 2015 12:52:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <COL402-EAS295F2E93FABEABF789204D5CDDD0@phx.gbl> References: <COL402-EAS295F2E93FABEABF789204D5CDDD0@phx.gbl> From: Jim Phillips <jim@ergophobia.org> Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 14:52:26 -0500 Message-ID: <CANe1mWzza00poapfPmsgRUiqt5qkamx_V6xtTKZCvTGd-SgVcw@mail.gmail.com> To: Raystonn <raystonn@hotmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bacb598c282d60515ab7d16 X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) 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 0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1YrAo3-0007U4-3D Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>, Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de> 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: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 19:53:04 -0000 --047d7bacb598c282d60515ab7d16 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Raystonn <raystonn@hotmail.com> wrote: > How about this as a happy medium default policy: Rather than select UTXOs >> based solely on age and limiting the size of the transaction, we select as >> many UTXOs as possible from as few addresses as possible, prioritizing >> which addresses to use based on the number of UTXOs it contains (more being >> preferable) and how old those UTXOs are (in order to reduce the fee)? > > If selecting older UTXOs gives higher priority for a lesser (or at least > not greater) fee, that is an incentive for a rational user to use the older > UTXOs. Such policy needs to be defended or removed. It doesn't support > privacy or a reduction in UTXOs. > Before starting this thread, I had completely forgotten that age was even a factor in determining which UTXOs to use. Frankly, I can't think of any reason why miners care how old a particular UTXO is when determining what fees to charge. I'm sure there is one, I just don't know what it is. I just tossed it in there as homage to Andreas who pointed out to me that it was still part of the selection criteria. --047d7bacb598c282d60515ab7d16 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><div class=3D"gmail_signat= ure"><div>On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Raystonn <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a= href=3D"mailto:raystonn@hotmail.com" target=3D"_blank">raystonn@hotmail.co= m</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><bl= ockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-lef= t-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padd= ing-left:1ex"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px= 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left= -style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style=3D"color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:= 12.8000001907349px">How about this as a happy medium default policy: Rather= than select UTXOs based solely on age and limiting the size of the transac= tion, we select as many UTXOs as possible from as few addresses as possible= , prioritizing which addresses to use based on the number of UTXOs it conta= ins (more being preferable) and how old those UTXOs are (in order to reduce= the fee)?=C2=A0</span></blockquote><p dir=3D"ltr">If selecting older UTXOs= gives higher priority for a lesser (or at least not greater) fee, that is = an incentive for a rational user to use the older UTXOs.=C2=A0 Such policy = needs to be defended or removed.=C2=A0 It doesn't support privacy or a = reduction in UTXOs.</p></blockquote><div>Before starting this thread, I had= completely forgotten that age was even a factor in determining which UTXOs= to use. Frankly, I can't think of any reason why miners care how old a= particular UTXO is when determining what fees to charge. I'm sure ther= e is one, I just don't know what it is. I just tossed it in there as ho= mage to Andreas who pointed out to me that it was still part of the selecti= on criteria.</div></div></div></div> --047d7bacb598c282d60515ab7d16--