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
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FA4AB3D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:25:10 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com (mail-pd0-f176.google.com
[209.85.192.176])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D38247C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:25:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pdbqm3 with SMTP id qm3so14164189pdb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Lhv7DKDaYD+yjSYcQYgGaRt2zJMXxT0T4tI342hxWGY=;
b=kMCG9zDCMTvzsMVMccAlh3lFUvaZ0Sf64mzuBaN68ZJnZF1ZpUUXUE80VbE4awmsR4
Sfgim2+ujWtAG6OzMXFJMNZevGVW9Aqbc1SbhoNM5e4QxDcK58/IZfhiM+pQQdu2Ezfz
ssLoPNoD5Q49FJEH24BhF8pU67ERZXoP4j22iWmGX6yu/bT6O+f08ZIOVvQehjmSR7C3
UXCT+kZKGKhiStx5kq+/9pTA74wCEY2VlzwT91gKjza02llOCwC2VAmVfSx+f4wjKKtt
AR1XbqYGkdNDQ4VzYKVnQX43fQiPhRHAp9NwcHpcjtONlo2R6MHFDzFoM8wWW3CksGIs
MCVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQncYqv+tIyOoPEO9WOC/rwvTViPE2m/RejD9Wd+qRn7T0PcQUuvwWK70tlMNdoUIIZbpk8m
X-Received: by 10.70.100.105 with SMTP id ex9mr2305742pdb.115.1436919909394;
Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.100.1.239] ([204.58.254.99])
by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
ie3sm2551661pbb.49.2015.07.14.17.25.07
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <55A5A837.1090203@thinlink.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:24:23 -0700
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Mempool "Expected Byte Stay" policy
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: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:25:10 -0000
Spammers out there are being very disrepectful of my fullnode resources
these days! I'm making some changes. In case others are interested,
here's a description:
There is now a maximum size for the memory pool. Space is allocated
with a pretty simple rule. For each tx, I calculate MY COST of
continuing to hold it in the mempool. I measure the cost to me by
"expected byte stay":
expectedByteStay = sizeBytes * expectedBlocksToConfirm(feeRate)
Rule 1: When there's not enough space for a new tx, I try to make space
by evicting txes with expectedByteStay higher than tx.
I'm NOT worrying about
- Fees
EXCEPT via their effect on confirmation time
- Coin age
You already made money on your old coins. Pay up.
- CPFP
Child's expectedBlocksToConfirm is max'ed with its
parent, then parent expectedByteStay is ADDED to child's
- Replacement
You'll get another chance in 2 hours (see below).
Rule 2: A transaction and its dependents are evicted on its 2-hour
anniversary, whether space is required or not
The latest expectedBlocksToConfirm(feeRate) table is applied to the
entire mempool periodically.
What do you think? I'll let you know how it works out. I'm putting a
lot of faith in the new fee estimation (particularly its size
independence). Another possibility is clog-ups by transactions that
look like they'll confirm next block, but don't because of factors other
than fees (other people's blacklists?)
|
