Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Wany6-0007hK-KR for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:11:14 +0000 Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Wany5-0006NR-8M for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:11:14 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id pn19so496949lab.34 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 08:11:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1Jb+6t3fX8j3C4UwLD+ZpaCQ6b1EHdQBqon/1SV0Kqw=; b=FSIppdmFbgJnyPpIyczyid4Kx93BrOsH2Veyj5XOi0dL2OGeZS+ZdS+JSr2z6rRKHr +GZmwwuS99plsS1W0z5aRaYAknNrXWsVDmGV3uEJeSRTkSiC6XUKi+5ojgxuQXpo8skj reKUWJdtYYZfMZmQRAZ1n2vSs2GQpZrnITE2fhyd3QyuB4J2nYNnGSt3fFFykQEnT+jE akJpTrSKSwW8bfi/GHi15xW3bRScZqFmXnqp16SnRAoQREWexlGGivclVmRZlMIJ6gxr LugeO7ZQj3OpXFtpzQRsxHgW4O5vsTPZOeovZxBywxU45Un6WdeTPBkq8rL1DDOF7uk7 XyWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkVoao6Ud5Pb6mwDP2hgGJH4NM2pnu6Y5iHC4xAZfnKetH2UjZp4Zsln94v62UvLnyQyBPP MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.137.5 with SMTP id qe5mr7461495lbb.16.1397747465193; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 08:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.60.196 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 08:11:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [85.53.138.195] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:11:05 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= To: Gavin Andresen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1Wany5-0006NR-8M Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Timed testing X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:11:14 -0000 On 4/17/14, Gavin Andresen wrote: > How is this different from just running in -regtest mode and asking the > nodes to generate a block after 1 or 2 seconds? There's no difference, the -timedtest mode does exactly that. But automatically instead of having to manually ask for a new block every second. I assume your position is that the difference is too small to justify a new mode, or that you just don't see any value in it. The -private mode, on the other hand, would allow you to simulate proof of work attacks as described in the previous post, but maybe there's a simpler way to do the same solely using regtest/timedtest. Maybe I should have asked the following questions before proposing anything: 1) How does someone simulate a pow race situation without doing any pow right now? Does anybody try these things? How? 2) If I wanted to measure validation performance, to get the number of peak tps that could be processed without taking block sides or network latency into account, how would I do that? Has anybody tried this before?