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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <ogunden@phauna.org>) id 1Z6gVC-0007Dl-5t
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 14:45:42 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of phauna.org
designates 208.82.98.102 as permitted sender)
client-ip=208.82.98.102; envelope-from=ogunden@phauna.org;
helo=peacecow.phauna.org;
Received: from phauna.org ([208.82.98.102] helo=peacecow.phauna.org)
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z6gVB-0005hu-57
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 14:45:42 +0000
Received: from pool-108-50-150-243.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net ([108.50.150.243]
helo=[192.168.50.11]) by peacecow.phauna.org with esmtpsa
(TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <ogunden@phauna.org>) id 1Z6gV5-0004gB-Ik
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:45:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5586CE0A.2020608@phauna.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 10:45:30 -0400
From: Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net> <CABm2gDoa7KxsgvREo3yiNjfd6AeayqAqkjMe2rvX8yyxR_ddcA@mail.gmail.com> <55831CAB.2080303@jrn.me.uk>
<1867667.WXWC1C9quc@crushinator> <CAOG=w-scXm-46sp2NgR2UUp20R5ujuaAzW-jU_Owh20C4Xc=9A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHLa0Mhnma8_ys2ckEA+dLT-EWnqO4j8YKMSaf3Tvv_K14czQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOG=w-tf7qz9XSkDg5POKtFLkHWDA==jf2iVxVL8wz1hqcAVOg@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP33GCiZHK1GV2Qt_R_AHK6SEjybGPtmORjqgvQ9MiYVZQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANg-TZBL-d4L6+kP7CGi89QkYtFEk4kGZZqB-5jp5K5Cm8nEZQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANg-TZBL-d4L6+kP7CGi89QkYtFEk4kGZZqB-5jp5K5Cm8nEZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam_score: -2.9
X-Spam_score_int: -28
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
running on the system "peacecow.phauna.org", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
label similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On 06/19/2015 07:48 AM,
Brooks Boyd wrote: > Has there been
any talk about reducing the time between blocks? If > blocks were
allowed to come twice as fast,
they would be able to clear > pending transactions
in the mempool the same as if the block size > doubled,
but would allow mining
to stay more decentralized since miners > wouldn't be working on such
large-scale
blocks? It would still take more > storage space to store the
blockchain, though. [...]
Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
-1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
X-Spam-Score: -3.0 (---)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Z6gVB-0005hu-57
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer
to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 14:45:42 -0000
On 06/19/2015 07:48 AM, Brooks Boyd wrote:
> Has there been any talk about reducing the time between blocks? If
> blocks were allowed to come twice as fast, they would be able to clear
> pending transactions in the mempool the same as if the block size
> doubled, but would allow mining to stay more decentralized since miners
> wouldn't be working on such large-scale blocks? It would still take more
> storage space to store the blockchain, though.
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg07663.html
|
