Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D01CC8A6 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:00:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com [209.85.212.174]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A2B089 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:00:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicne3 with SMTP id ne3so91521148wic.0 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:00:30 -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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=oUHHxrDErs9B3aMuA/N+9LqmKMFOi02wUvgopk4MA/g=; b=F8myle9ivRd9OhVQltu8ukgZP0rIHXKc2zl8LO2MBOgEFuw1pt3V208iGUbiXZqVgF UWbr867bbWBSE+woTVGxD9z+EnCCLSU1NksJsAi9CgvN5iC0I56WDDy+82uA+S3aPJgQ l/LQLlRnYjNq9K+rvxCHUtjkdN9mAdqfDISqlWIr8BXSzI2JMAOlr4RSddTx0BSZPhq/ x7Lgu4RApDlqODtr0I1RDanNF4HxJ6sjXTCAsMB2BzSczH2X829VuE5n/X9dSN2m1za4 8Z4cNUbYfD9DNYTlxL63y1+OP2HPA3jRkBbnLLnPrOXHKx1QG3sV/OnuPN1I/3PZD+tX XrnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnNVbktZVE4T1eMpHjDcU5TSdiCaR1hg3uRZcVAgpyB3EL/vEVOhgk9aHQBSYFc47Ai9/0W MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.8.135 with SMTP id r7mr46042899wia.58.1439370030139; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:00:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3295391.2gkoFVhbEs@pluto> References: <3295391.2gkoFVhbEs@pluto> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:00:29 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Thomas Zander Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0418271e58dfaa051d1973b4 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, 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 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:00:34 -0000 --f46d0418271e58dfaa051d1973b4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Aug 12, 2015 10:11 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Tuesday 11. August 2015 21.51.59 Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > If people are doing transactions despite being unreliable, there > > must be a use for them. > > Thats one usage of the form unreliable. > Yes, if people start getting their transactions thrown out because of full > blocks or full memory pools, then its unreliable to send stuff. > > Much more importantly is the software is unreliable at such loads. Bitcoin > core will continue to grow in memory consumption, and eventually crash. Or, > worse, crash the system its running on. > We know of some issues in the software with regards to running at > 100% > capacity, I'm sure we'll find more when it actually happens. Don't fear this happening at 1 MB, fear this happening at any size. This needs to be solved regardless of the block size. Don't worry, the "doing nothing side" is already taking care of this. I will give the link for the second time... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6470 --f46d0418271e58dfaa051d1973b4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Aug 12, 2015 10:11 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.lin= uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 11. August 2015 21.51.59 Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrot= e:
> >=C2=A0 If people are doing transactions despite being unreliable, = there
> > must be a use for them.
>
> Thats one usage of the form unreliable.
> Yes, if people start getting their transactions thrown out because of = full
> blocks or full memory pools, then its unreliable to send stuff.
>
> Much more importantly is the software is unreliable at such loads. Bit= coin
> core will continue to grow in memory consumption, and eventually crash= . Or,
> worse, crash the system its running on.
> We know of some issues in the software with regards to running at >= 100%
> capacity, I'm sure we'll find more when it actually happens.

Don't fear this happening at 1 MB, fear this happening a= t any size. This needs to be solved regardless of the block size.
Don't worry, the "doing nothing side" is already taking care = of this. I will give the link for the second time...

htt= ps://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6470

--f46d0418271e58dfaa051d1973b4--