Return-Path: <sickpig@gmail.com> Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32E51C5D for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:02:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lf0-f42.google.com (mail-lf0-f42.google.com [209.85.215.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53BCE106 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:02:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f42.google.com with SMTP id p203so70045993lfa.0 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 02:02:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=dGocxZPvOYuAsH+N8Jd6W37WuGW8F5/v9O8J7buQP5U=; b=aTBzoUCI/0iRnQaF+JXs2egQH9IdI/HN1Q9Vd/6muB/IyH6eNpc6IgPHW3KqHG3clv DkUzcWHFYWgz9byHou8JXFe0aznGV19kIOJt6gnWWHuqftgCQhgT1y3DNzNN2AkImXof 3yA17ouHBzprNLtfBnxakisoAhqzJSIDcES10j/yVZgiXhsEqDrTUHG38WWhnG1c2lw+ EZVuFzV3MLheHTSoRqEGBVL8PkV2CZlhZ59nn2/zrkCZyxZECl2ce4HNiTn7ewVMD3HU BLmMoCjHHkDY4ZzL3/vO/wnKU2ISVDpNFnYRm71tN8SNzpiCwzSRw8eYo9vQbzXIVLyo icjw== X-Received: by 10.25.170.149 with SMTP id t143mr960079lfe.162.1450432932229; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 02:02:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.89.139 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 02:01:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20151217175541.GA10809@sapphire.erisian.com.au> References: <CADm_WcYWh5EnBCzQQVc04sf-0seh2zrmc+5dH8Z-Bo78jhPnfA@mail.gmail.com> <49257841-66C8-4EF7-980B-73DC604CA591@mattcorallo.com> <9869fe48a4fc53fc355a35cead73fca2@xbt.hk> <CAK_HAC-QmFiQGePpPH7n7qV-A4mkQdsWmgwA__mc1GBkTa6oFA@mail.gmail.com> <CABm2gDp+UFua=ZqzDFhZ7F6MeLbc_fBv13WYcpttSP1Lyy1ngg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+c4Zow4qnhQZFgaY-hOJA4LUtuM_rb1xRbMAOD7gW3i2KzB9A@mail.gmail.com> <20151217175541.GA10809@sapphire.erisian.com.au> From: "sickpig@gmail.com" <sickpig@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:01:52 +0100 Message-ID: <CA+c4Zoxp91rpcKFqs_FJD_o1e6QzUH0Hk+jm1r9ZVsL4so_VHA@mail.gmail.com> To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11410436b2378c0527293b1f X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:24:07 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segregated Witness in the context of Scaling Bitcoin X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:02:15 -0000 --001a11410436b2378c0527293b1f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anthony, On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 04:51:19PM +0100, sickpig--- via bitcoin-dev wrot= e: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrote: > > > Unless I'm missing something, 2 mb x4 =3D 8mb, so bip102 + SW is alre= ady > > > equivalent to the 2-4-8 "compromise" proposal [...] > > isn't SegWit gain ~75%? hence 2mb x 1.75 =3D 3.5. > > Segwit as proposed gives a 75% *discount* to witness data with the > same limit, so at a 1MB limit, that might give you (eg) 2.05MB made up > of 650kB of base block data plus 1.4MB of witness data; where 650kB + > 1.4MB/4 =3D 1MB at the 1MB limit; or 4.1MB made up of 1.3MB of base plus > 2.8MB of witness, for 1.3MB+2.8MB/4 =3D 2MB at a 2MB limit. > > > 4x is theoric gain you get in case of 2-2 multisig txs. > > With segregated witness, 2-2 multisig transactions are made up of 94B > of base data, plus about 214B of witness data; discounting the witness > data by 75% gives 94+214/4=3D148 bytes. That compares to about 301B for > a 2-2 multisig transaction with P2SH rather than segwit, and 301/148 > gives about a 2.03x gain, not a 4x gain. A 2.05x gain is what I assumed > to get the numbers above. > > You get further improvements with, eg, 3-of-3 multisig, but to get > the full, theoretical 4x gain you'd need a fairly degenerate looking > transaction. > > Pay to public key hash with segwit lets you move about half the > transaction data into the witness, giving about a 1.6x improvement by > my count (eg 1.6MB =3D 800kB of base data plus 800kB of witness data, > where 800kB+800kB/4=3D1MB), so I think a gain of between 1.6 and 2.0 is > a reasonable expectation to have for the proposed segwit scheme overall. > > many thanks for the explanation. so it should be fair to say that BIP 102 + SW would bring a gain between 2*1.6 and 2*2. Just for the sake of simplicity if we take the middle of the interval we could say that BIP102 + SW will bring us a max block (virtual) size equal to 1MB * 2 * 1.8 =3D 3.6 Is it right? --001a11410436b2378c0527293b1f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Anthony, <br><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class= =3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Anthony Towns via bitcoin= -dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat= ion.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></s= pan> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex= ;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 04:51= :19PM +0100, sickpig--- via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br> <span class=3D"">> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wro= te:<br> > > Unless I'm missing something, 2 mb x4 =3D 8mb, so bip102 + SW= is already<br> </span>> > equivalent to the 2-4-8 "compromise" proposal [.= ..]<br> <span class=3D"">> isn't SegWit gain ~75%? hence 2mb x 1.75 =3D 3.5.= <br> <br> </span>Segwit as proposed gives a 75% *discount* to witness data with the<b= r> same limit, so at a 1MB limit, that might give you (eg) 2.05MB made up<br> of 650kB of base block data plus 1.4MB of witness data; where 650kB +<br> 1.4MB/4 =3D 1MB at the 1MB limit; or 4.1MB made up of 1.3MB of base plus<br= > 2.8MB of witness, for 1.3MB+2.8MB/4 =3D 2MB at a 2MB limit.<br> <span class=3D""><br> > 4x is theoric gain you get in case of 2-2 multisig txs.<br> <br> </span>With segregated witness, 2-2 multisig transactions are made up of 94= B<br> of base data, plus about 214B of witness data; discounting the witness<br> data by 75% gives 94+214/4=3D148 bytes. That compares to about 301B for<br> a 2-2 multisig transaction with P2SH rather than segwit, and 301/148<br> gives about a 2.03x gain, not a 4x gain. A 2.05x gain is what I assumed<br> to get the numbers above.<br> <br> You get further improvements with, eg, 3-of-3 multisig, but to get<br> the full, theoretical 4x gain you'd need a fairly degenerate looking<br= > transaction.<br> <br> Pay to public key hash with segwit lets you move about half the<br> transaction data into the witness, giving about a 1.6x improvement by<br> my count (eg 1.6MB =3D 800kB of base data plus 800kB of witness data,<br> where 800kB+800kB/4=3D1MB), so I think a gain of between 1.6 and 2.0 is<br> a reasonable expectation to have for the proposed segwit scheme overall.<br= > <br></blockquote><br></div>many thanks for the explanation. <br><br></div><= div class=3D"gmail_extra">so it should be fair to say that BIP 102 + SW wou= ld bring a gain between 2*1.6 and 2*2. <br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"= ><br>Just for the sake of simplicity if we take the middle of the interval = we could say <br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">that BIP102 + SW will bri= ng us a max block (virtual) size equal to 1MB * 2 * 1.8 =3D 3.6<br><br></di= v><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Is it right? <br></div><div class=3D"gmail_ext= ra"><br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div></div> --001a11410436b2378c0527293b1f--