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
|
Return-Path: <slurms@gmx.us>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7819514
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:12:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68D2F18A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:12:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [46.101.177.144] by 3capp-mailcom-bs04.server.lan (via HTTP);
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:12:04 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <trinity-7d2b5b09-8b25-47fc-b01e-7ffbdc8138b3-1437671524217@3capp-mailcom-bs04>
From: "Slurms MacKenzie" <slurms@gmx.us>
To: leo@LeoWandersleb.de
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:12:04 +0200
Importance: normal
Sensitivity: Normal
In-Reply-To: <55B11825.90700@LeoWandersleb.de>
References: <trinity-c97bc41b-a953-4580-b2d2-ebdda9eb96b2-1437661199263@3capp-mailcom-bs02>,
<55B11825.90700@LeoWandersleb.de>
X-UI-Message-Type: mail
X-Priority: 3
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:0+mGoNuRECIGc7Q0e77GRhVn1Nmii2E5F/ErSyyt3Ob
bx0Era3yWuiTZ2wmJkN/vsKFRYl2NH4JTiY0p5WN08B8Q0x+R/
PZNwJ8axAI1w55bL21rNPkKCZeJjtfLvnD9AagqETTU4NUgr6I
3EQv1epqQYl8DJKT5i+yfQkDBQbpbST5eGoHSLE/seOPmXNjHg
IcgqPeK6rTW/qjtCLaqKFSBzRm8VAbLgLP5yI43jSl7iQp96d7
sRefbbYMBAYL/bmD+28RU56ESPnsWKIh+gdky7kinY0mRIAZGe
kufMNooDJ3XgkhOozNr+KVEpIrK
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:zel6Aq2aNRc=:vR3bT48qsNOg9jdyQ9yrQL
0I3jy7GuwD+ZIsC5DnDgaWrW0Va+V8yyorNjhjfaNVnGdzWLplI7jfom+s8uffubQbhWJEgXO
CYPiWGHnUBtlh4w+ODJPgIF6fRyddzpvlQpsSwE0ElrC7vr2NFlafjG8Xwmj+PHudt+qjHDld
xHs0h4dViKjfvsgN3sPLjx1t2ASZy0H51YueNPLNFZUe0w6MqKyknDqni6TKbZSDzl7u4OTTr
ZXLZu4ALTCyso/tX06diYjQPNRcYwfJ53T6niaLmBOTqc69P5wQQc68J4nVojd6mmFglE0dME
5vhjwDOHV2mopBXiaFzwe6tEDDbqvoZLpx5U2wtT8W5ZTGHB4ixmTDNQX3HRFTBCdcx8te8oL
7uK85Vq8qLuWD/3lltmzBiGf6WvPjwZ0RrLHfmtV9wtHzvmLPBK6g/+MwTDQ5c32+JZUrgP1q
H59FfnNWYg==
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Node Speed Test
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: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:12:08 -0000
<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;"><div>
<div>I was testing against otherwise idle nodes, fetching blocks back from the tip of the chain in an attempt to eliminate any unfair effects of caching. During the time my crawler was running there was no new blocks on the network (luck more than design), so other than initially syncing nodes and transaction broadcasts there should have been no traffic from these peers other than me.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>There's unfortunately not enough granularity in my log to tell the difference between nodes which returned bad results (pruned nodes perhaps), and those that timed out. The total number of those was around 10 of 202 successful handshakes, which is fairly insignificant anyway. I'll retool at some point soon and run this a second time with better logging and some other tweaks I've since realised would help get more, cleaner data.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>As Peter Todd has pointed out, my numbers are blue sky optimism and should be taken with a grain of salt as far as justifying larger blocks. I'm finding the ceiling of the node pushing a block to a single peer (which is unrealistic on the network), and leaving little headroom for anything else.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div name="quote" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px; padding: 10px 0 10px 10px; border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 23, 2015 at 7:36 PM<br/>
<b>From:</b> "Leo Wandersleb via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org><br/>
<b>To:</b> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br/>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Node Speed Test</div>
<div name="quoted-content">Thank you a lot for doing this test!<br/>
<br/>
Two questions:<br/>
<br/>
1) A node is typically connected to many nodes that would all in parallel<br/>
download said block. In your test you measured how fast new blocks that<br/>
presumably are being uploaded in parallel to all those other nodes are being<br/>
uploaded? Or did you download blocks while those nodes were basically idle?<br/>
<br/>
2) What is your percentage of the very slow connections?<br/>
<br/>
On 07/23/2015 11:19 AM, slurms--- via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br/>
> On this day, the Bitcoin network was crawled and reachable nodes surveyed to find their maximum throughput in order to determine if it can safely support a faster block rate. Specifically this is an attempt to prove or disprove the common statement that 1MB blocks were only suitable slower internet connections in 2009 when Bitcoin launched, and that connection speeds have improved to the point of obviously supporting larger blocks.<br/>
><br/>
><br/>
> The testing methodology is as follows:<br/>
><br/>
> * Nodes were randomly selected from a peers.dat, 5% of the reachable nodes in the network were contacted.<br/>
><br/>
> * A random selection of blocks was downloaded from each peer.<br/>
><br/>
> * There is some bias towards higher connection speeds, very slow connections (<30KB/s) timed out in order to run the test at a reasonable rate.<br/>
><br/>
> * The connecting node was in Amsterdam with a 1GB NIC.<br/>
><br/>
><br/>
> Results:<br/>
><br/>
> * 37% of connected nodes failed to upload blocks faster than 1MB/s.<br/>
><br/>
> * 16% of connected nodes uploaded blocks faster than 10MB/s.<br/>
><br/>
> * Raw data, one line per connected node, kilobytes per second <a href="http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=6b4NuiVQ" target="_blank">http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=6b4NuiVQ</a><br/>
><br/>
><br/>
> This does not support the theory that the network has the available bandwidth for increased block sizes, as in its current state 37% of nodes would fail to upload a 20MB block to a single peer in under 20 seconds (referencing a number quoted by Gavin). If the bar for suitability is placed at taking only 1% of the block time (6 seconds) to upload one block to one peer, then 69% of the network fails for 20MB blocks. For comparison, only 10% fail this metric for 1MB blocks.<br/>
> _______________________________________________<br/>
> bitcoin-dev mailing list<br/>
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br/>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
_______________________________________________<br/>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br/>
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br/>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></body></html>
|
