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 DE400DBB for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2018 14:48:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail4.protonmail.ch (mail4.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.27]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD32CA8 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2018 14:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2018 14:47:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1535813277; bh=CbtWtg7J8FcwPYw3uUuNhmP9lDTpvaY4hoju9x4QqE0=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From; b=CLFF7mU4cWaHQhr5lyDQzgw7eHXnNOv76/V+of5yBjW6CYAak4QwuNXlQbsBr78HZ NlmV650h0UbzzH58Gm7mGno9pmcYxcwARQFpmj0wMrZnJtpY5ozlxiaePhRa4z9DsM /QhWj/fNxfBbS0CVrXOo2rWxM0SLeJhHw/qkDZ84= To: Gregory Maxwell , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: rhavar@protonmail.com Reply-To: rhavar@protonmail.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20180830200239.ujuzh7pitcuatdt3@petertodd.org> <7E247E56-38A5-4B99-941A-A2CC837D2567@xbt.hk> Feedback-ID: RdfuD--Ffc-FNb_4UIG1XA3s5stj1f6Yt84KENdha_3WoiW3STYpu7X5uGR72LvTfQZpxEhSRHGSlNfV5XM5RA==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 03 Sep 2018 23:25:52 +0000 Cc: shiva sitamraju Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Testnet3 Reest 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: Sat, 01 Sep 2018 14:48:03 -0000 I think I mentioned it before, but seems semi-relevant to this thread so I'= d like to throw my vote behind pretty tiny blocks on testnet (like max 50-1= 00k weight) to try help simulate a fee-market like situation. (Although lately there's been a lot of testnet spam and full blocks, which = has really made testing easier. But I don't know how long this situation wi= ll last) -Ryan =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 On August 30, 2018 7:06 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:21 PM Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > > A public testnet is still useful so in articles people could make refer= ences to these transactions. > > Maybe we could have 2 testnets at the same time, with one having a smal= ler block size? > > I would much rather have a signed blocks testnet, with a predictable > structured reorg pattern* (and a config flag so you can make your node > ignore all blocks that are going to get reorged out in a reorg of nth > or larger). There are many applications where the mined testnet just > doesn't give you anything useful... it's too stable when you want it > to be a bit unstable and too wildly unstable when you want a bit of > stability-- e.g. there are very few test cases where a 20,000 block > reorg does anything useful for you; yet they happen on testnet. > > We looked at doing this previously in Bitcoin core and jtimon had some > patches, but the existing approach increased the size of the > blockindex objects in memory while not in signed testnet mode. This > could probably have been fixed by turning one of the fields like the > merkel root into a union of it's normal value and a pointer a > look-aside block index that is used only in signed block testnet mode. > > Obviously such a mode wouldn't be a replacement for an ordinary > testnet, but it would be a useful middle ground between regtest (that > never sees anything remotely surprising and can't easily be used for > collaborative testing) and full on testnet where your attempts to test > against ordinary noise require you cope your entirely universe being > removed from existence and replaced by something almost but not quite > entirely different at the whim of some cthulhuian blind idiot god. > > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev