MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMZUoK=xUDdNxEh7GYku27Smre3qm5zrmz7tEeZecn-2RBh_Eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMZUoKnGx3p7=Kg96E3EEyJ8aFC7ezsvec_pAnN7oJz7-VbyLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180212225828.GB8551@fedora-23-dvm>
	<CAMZUoKnFBVFhaq61wKu_CcZgRKc5aoeTa-wq9h2CXH0WWHd3NQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180212234225.GA9131@fedora-23-dvm>
	<CAMZUoK=xUDdNxEh7GYku27Smre3qm5zrmz7tEeZecn-2RBh_Eg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Sanders <gsanders87@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:16:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAB3F3DstVgbfXKKu9ZfD3ttDDdtvrhZEooTakYzVqqG0BkMJQQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.io>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Revisiting BIP 125 RBF policy.
Precedence: list

--f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Yes.

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:19:40PM -0500, Russell O'Connor wrote:
>> > Surely CPFP is already computing the package-fee rates of mempool
>> > transactions.  That is the value we need to compute.
>>
>> True, maybe we can just reuse the CPFP calculation now. That said, AFAIK
>> that's
>> only done in the miner code, not the mempool, so that may not be trivial
>> to
>> actually do.
>>
>
> Do you (or anyone else) know if the package fee rate is considered when
> ejecting transactions from the bottom of the mempool when the mempool gets
> too large?
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Yes.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote">On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Russell O&#39;Connor via bitcoin=
-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat=
ion.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</s=
pan> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span class=3D"">On Mon, Feb 12=
, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Todd <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pete@=
petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank">pete@petertodd.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<b=
r></span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D""><span>On Mon, Feb =
12, 2018 at 06:19:40PM -0500, Russell O&#39;Connor wrote:</span></span><spa=
n class=3D""><span><br>
&gt; Surely CPFP is already computing the package-fee rates of mempool<br>
&gt; transactions.=C2=A0 That is the value we need to compute.<br>
<br>
</span>True, maybe we can just reuse the CPFP calculation now. That said, A=
FAIK that&#39;s<br>
only done in the miner code, not the mempool, so that may not be trivial to=
<br>
actually do.<br></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Do you (or anyone e=
lse) know if the package fee rate is considered when ejecting transactions =
from the bottom of the mempool when the mempool gets too large?<br></div></=
div></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--f403045c250e1c823f05652cc3b5--