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
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
|
Return-Path: <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 278F371
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 Aug 2015 14:57:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com (mail-la0-f48.google.com
[209.85.215.48])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCBE8A9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 Aug 2015 14:57:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by labd1 with SMTP id d1so9852685lab.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 07 Aug 2015 07:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=loDhTqINhjaFnlDXLdsDjf9fRbpNV6ryLebbbPP77Ng=;
b=q9BL7g4FGxW6R1TNxmJ2vN7rxQzMqmnWJGUKSxiW8Rx466scnPNxsXda8QcJ42VDsr
4fAzhtssmNqvKm7iJDY9ps0sGGs7njEh+F+Ti+88RgLsUGVmfwJk5XfZyS4Q/X6/c5I/
p7wNfzSIRG/GWX1/4WWDqZW9V3JcsZyOS9DGV1S1+A53tqswGWPzStD3M1/QFNiz4EF7
ElhUWOs7kZ6CxGPz4YykSEWR8ji04AU9GhvofU450BeH73phIBbkt6fcb7pFTc3devO9
lH4rUtJCoqpYA1lALxCGQSBOQpUYahNYz9ul3vmAljCfpYnEIxWxFjxXJkJcDUEOaWRu
qXWA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.149.164 with SMTP id ub4mr7932342lbb.65.1438959444032;
Fri, 07 Aug 2015 07:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.143.195 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 07:57:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 10:57:23 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T16fH+56isq95m4+QWsKwP==tf75ep8ghnEcBoV4OtZJA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b343f88820296051cb9dab8
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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [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 <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, 07 Aug 2015 14:57:27 -0000
--047d7b343f88820296051cb9dab8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Popping this into it's own thread:
Jorge asked:
> >> 1) If "not now", when will it be a good time to let the "market
> >> minimum fee for miners to mine a transaction" rise above zero?
>
I answered:
> > 1. If you are willing to wait an infinite amount of time, I think the
> > minimum fee will always be zero or very close to zero, so I think it's a
> > silly question.
>
Which Jorge misinterpreted to mean that I think there will always be at
least one miner willing to mine a transaction for free.
That's not what I'm thinking. It is just an observation based on the fact
that blocks are found at random intervals.
Every once in a while the network will get lucky and we'll find six blocks
in ten minutes. If you are deciding what transaction fee to put on your
transaction, and you're willing to wait until that
six-blocks-in-ten-minutes once-a-week event, submit your transaction with a
low fee.
All the higher-fee transactions waiting to be confirmed will get confirmed
in the first five blocks and, if miners don't have any floor on the fee
they'll accept (they will, but lets pretend they won't) then your
very-low-fee transaction will get confirmed.
In the limit, that logic becomes "wait an infinite amount of time, pay zero
fee."
So... I have no idea what the 'market minimum fee' will be, because I have
no idea how long people will be willing to wait, how many times they'll be
willing to retransmit a low-fee transaction that gets evicted from
memory-limited memory pools, or how much memory miners will be willing to
dedicate to storing transactions that won't confirm for a long time because
they're waiting for a flurry of blocks to be found.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
--047d7b343f88820296051cb9dab8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Popping this into it's own thread:<br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Jorge asked:<br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">>> 1=
) If "not now", when will it be a good time to let the "mark=
et<br>
>> minimum fee for miners to mine a transaction" rise above zero=
?<br>
</span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I answered:</div><div>=C2=A0</div><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">
>=C2=A01. If you are willing to wait an infinite amount of time, I think=
the<br>
> minimum fee will always be zero or very close to zero, so I think it&#=
39;s a<br>
> silly question.<br></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Which Jorge=
misinterpreted to mean that I think there will always be at least one mine=
r willing to mine a transaction for free.</div><div><br></div><div>That'=
;s not what I'm thinking. It is just an observation based on the fact t=
hat blocks are found at random intervals.</div><div><br></div><div>Every on=
ce in a while the network will get lucky and we'll find six blocks in t=
en minutes. If you are deciding what transaction fee to put on your transac=
tion, and you're willing to wait until that six-blocks-in-ten-minutes o=
nce-a-week event, submit your transaction with a low fee.</div><div><br></d=
iv><div>All the higher-fee transactions waiting to be confirmed will get co=
nfirmed in the first five blocks and, if miners don't have any floor on=
the fee they'll accept (they will, but lets pretend they won't) th=
en your very-low-fee transaction will get confirmed.</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>In the limit, that logic becomes "wait an infinite amount of time, =
pay zero fee."</div><div><br></div><div>So... I have no idea what the =
'market minimum fee' will be, because I have no idea how long peopl=
e will be willing to wait, how many times they'll be willing to retrans=
mit a low-fee transaction that gets evicted from memory-limited memory pool=
s, or how much memory miners will be willing to dedicate to storing transac=
tions that won't confirm for a long time because they're waiting fo=
r a flurry of blocks to be found.</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_si=
gnature"><br></div>
</div></div>
--047d7b343f88820296051cb9dab8--
|
