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
|
Return-Path: <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71670957
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 May 2017 16:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com (mail-oi0-f52.google.com
[209.85.218.52])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3D6BF0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 May 2017 16:28:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id b204so6085437oii.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 09 May 2017 09:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=nxk3f3hyyGCrg/cWPBjWwMmj5BfDFMYj4fo4BTz0KGQ=;
b=rJBwI/z/9p9W1LSZAMu5XR3doKRWSQlUAaH0zecFOlyz4aQcwO6WvYahFnUUK8Sm92
IHCrDAbDTKsKq4Vc9E4vIUL7WCt4hfu8vL/rqz8Js7kUFgYmnfzNc0JjbfmzCLtoVB0U
BnpyuFf4PCBCHGen3cU8dlgcD+rAoY5VvvJYliJRkQJipUHVfLJ6ildYoUJbOxorAWeX
FHMZkfwplUekMvqjwnZsxidi9Y7iqLNKja5CezoV1uku4sCWAErQK81RHirDtG2WIpd1
x/4z4K7HUEhvlSiAhpHjCWfXXaOpQgZY/Rv7kjXkZbEewHH9xGIZlkIvJqU8l360SEXo
UxyA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=nxk3f3hyyGCrg/cWPBjWwMmj5BfDFMYj4fo4BTz0KGQ=;
b=g9lliVt+iLXbvnbre4ZjDqQQvMJR4Sx1o5TUvHI/Dqki+Ve6I+y6eEU0qxiRWkZ8/I
D2KoD+GvfJy3LAF9A/AWUiJ8X5wRWyrbP8R4tjrJ/+AB/IRwMVMnA0Be2yBbW4s3xiK2
vpvT4YwLjozD04pedKYgu3FgCVqUGcwg90EKyd7Rr68qMweQzJGVu9XXHRJ6fMadNiFS
+Is06oViU28qG2LE/YwHtyV6bEy7jeHsxTOd0F39SBGBX48K1/yYtluyKj2S7FhlB4mF
zLWfBs3sKuRzSPpqBQQrPI3U+tAbTyRbLJtoY2gvzhXPZ56H/gady5MCGVgfpPtJ3Kdo
AuYQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAfSJR69p7ZGcK3XhCeFhZaRdxZuXEFAHa8jesCU2hr/w8+EZhy
C0fua77qOTfFIRiKtAiMA+LHKBVM5Q==
X-Received: by 10.157.1.97 with SMTP id 88mr374031otu.66.1494347280096; Tue,
09 May 2017 09:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.130.166 with HTTP; Tue, 9 May 2017 09:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKzdR-rKQaiKF18j44HjxuHY5pcmPwsce5ab-+zGRDnxjhBQdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKzdR-qojNn8OtUTPbxa0JauK9nmo2ZGm4ihKuyzsz_FAgokDw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMBsKS_j7Lso6fHoMPkrQ7UFwKfxOERAAqL=aUF83O4CqL+iFg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKzdR-on-w9EF+2hLjchdyHB1gj7fi4QnybA=J4Cz7yyN3KKNA@mail.gmail.com>
<7B918396-5968-4908-83C8-0F77DA8DB037@xbt.hk>
<CAKzdR-rKQaiKF18j44HjxuHY5pcmPwsce5ab-+zGRDnxjhBQdw@mail.gmail.com>
From: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 11:27:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CADvTj4pSXxCirfFf_WU9x_TUmk7DmThM4a6yybOgq96hecc=Xg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sergio Demian Lerner <sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no 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: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Some real-world results about the current Segwit
Discount
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Tue, 09 May 2017 16:28:01 -0000
Doing a second soft-fork from 50% to 75% sounds more difficult since
that's going from a more restrictive ruleset to less restrictive, you
might be able to hack around it but it wouldn't be a fully backwards
compatible change like going from 75% to 50% would be. 50% vs 75% does
affect max transactions/second in practice, the exact amount depends
on the real world usage of course though.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Thanks Johnson and Hampus for the clarifications.
> However, I would rather do the opposite: soft-fork to 50% now, and soft-f=
ork
> again to 75% discount later if needed, because it doesn't affect the max
> transactions/second.
>
> Segwit as it is today should be activated. However if it is not before
> November, then for the next Segwit attempt I would choose a more
> conservative 50% discount.
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Johnson Lau <jl2012@xbt.hk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > On 9 May 2017, at 21:49, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev
>> > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > So it seems the 75% discount has been chosen with the idea that in the
>> > future the current transaction pattern will shift towards multisigs. T=
his is
>> > not a bad idea, as it's the only direction Bitcoin can scale without a=
HF.
>> > But it's a bad idea if we end up doing, for example, a 2X blocksize
>> > increase HF in the future. In that case it's much better to use a 50%
>> > witness discount, and do not make scaling risky by making the worse ca=
se
>> > block size 8 Mbytes, when it could have been 2*2.7=3D5.4 Mbytes.
>> >
>>
>> As we could change any parameter in a hardfork, I don=E2=80=99t think th=
is has any
>> relation with the current BIP141 proposal. We could just use 75% in a
>> softfork, and change that to a different value (or completely redefine t=
he
>> definition of weight) with a hardfork later.
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
|
