From: Prayank <prayank@tutanota.de>
To: yanmaani@cock.li
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block weight penalty for UTXO set growth
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:59:56 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MYmn7jG--7-2@tutanota.de> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 700 bytes --]
Hello Yanmaani,
Incentives for UTXO consolidation already exists IMO.
1.If UTXO consolidation is done when fee rates are low (less congestion in mempool), it helps in saving money in lot of cases. Example: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/100811/
2.If running full node for Bitcoin, it will help in a smaller UTXO set.
In few cases it affects privacy though like post coinjoin.
TBH I couldn't understand everything you mentioned including the part in which fees decrease is mentioned because of smaller block. Fees should increase if such blocks are regularly mined and are predictable IMO. Not sure if everyone will agree to the other things mentioned in the proposal.
--
Prayank
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1052 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2021-04-21 4:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-21 4:59 Prayank [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-04-20 1:22 [bitcoin-dev] Block weight penalty for UTXO set growth yanmaani
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=MYmn7jG--7-2@tutanota.de \
--to=prayank@tutanota.de \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=yanmaani@cock.li \
/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