summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/42/7ee33e473efc28b016f75f3c91639423fbd1c7
blob: c5415beff9462547f07836dab3249a6fdd879f09 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60567BBC
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:21:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148111.authsmtp.net (outmail148111.authsmtp.net
	[62.13.148.111])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBCF0118
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:21:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
	by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5RFLr8Y003974;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 16:21:53 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [33.91.28.142] (mf62d36d0.tmodns.net [208.54.45.246])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5RFLpjN018483
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 16:21:52 +0100 (BST)
In-Reply-To: <CALgxB7udA85BWetBGc-RN=72ZtVPK9Q5HW8YRDKA08M38XqJqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALgxB7udA85BWetBGc-RN=72ZtVPK9Q5HW8YRDKA08M38XqJqQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:21:25 +0000
To: Michael Naber <mickeybob@gmail.com>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Message-ID: <1EF70EBC-8BB8-4A93-8591-52B2B0335F6C@petertodd.org>
X-Server-Quench: 3d10bcd9-1ce0-11e5-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aAdMdAUUEkAaAgsB AmMbWlJeUlx7XGE7 aQpZcwBZfE5LQQdu
	VldNRFdNFUssBH53 el5ELBlzfwFOezB1 YU5mEHMPXUQoJhJ0
	X08HQG0bZGY1bX1N U0leagNUcgZDfk5E bwQuUz1vNG8XDSg5
	AwQ0PjZ0MThBHWx8 CjkXKkoVWksHVhU7 QggYGjAuBkBNWyJ7
	MxwrYnQYG00Sen4z I1ZpfVMdMgN6
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 208.54.45.246/465
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Proposed Compromise to the Block Size Limit
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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:21:55 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



On 27 June 2015 10:39:51 GMT-04:00, Michael Naber <mickeybob@gmail.com> wrote:
>Compromise: Can we agree that raising the block size to a static 8MB
>now
>with a plan to increase it further should demand necessitate except in
>the
>special case above is a reasonable path forward?

It's not a reasonable path forward right now given the lack of testing done with 8MB+ blocks, among many other problems. A way to help make that appear more reasonable would be to setup a 8MB testnet as I suggested, with two years or so of 8MB blocks in history as well as a large UTXO set to test performance characteristics.

Of course, that'll be a 840GB download - if that's unreasonable you might want to ask why 8MB blocks are reasonable...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQE9BAEBCAAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJVjr9n
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lnc47AIAIIwu4maaJs4pAKpK00jQnhPNIQ8LPvijD/8vvyugA1z
OLxlRrn8zs7JPFbxWOAzK2qzT1RksSd0gbXqWm/Saqk9CAG5LBp7Oq0HAVE23XYt
6BvyhjyhYaZjDrv+SZvlSjdl5xfpDNPMIXMi7XblKD9hm1GIUSVIYAOinOSVIy0B
HlKyn/xc4MaO8DuzQcs0vsNMudVQFLMOLjMWz/7iv41NnB/Ujjzv/6845Z1g7Opf
d5AfxhPHZixshqav/lF7ly7xQwSZZpoJCyFdtzCNG47EQmFYY9e22uy1KVzS7Zeo
qYPi3KRx5+vFtHHJMDYG5EIMTwI4l/4+lY/Sd0CFWss=
=0IOS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----