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
134
|
Return-Path: <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04D37BA6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:26:41 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com (mail-wg0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DB94124
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:26:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wgqq4 with SMTP id q4so19365599wgq.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=0f80tk0W2jqfnX2EPXQulcw0dMkjoyDZRvFompCt/cI=;
b=OZ0lsn88sIna8Bvhkqh7dTJRGz/exC/nmAhVU+P+79h354dyb0cfpl4H9Di42oi7fe
J5zFAiLbb8F0cuXkusmEse6/2rnHkZqA0jwZ3l2OE/F31t5WyYEBN9e+ojHHautKW3II
mjUEXG4NB8jF4vC1oQsK4lRZq75kX/UtdwgbizuKynFA3hTYBfAHQFFlCnUXtE6Dn26L
V/Kn522Jk8ri08yqrNIWT+gTgLEA3fzp7qjEOALl7w70oVmzdHwdZ1QBCSGZ1Y9HSjEb
hpKMm5hE1yKY+oaQboVJnY89T9rdqaH4xN+3BkuKEF7JBEueg+bJHBoriUquCgC1Rx9w
y4yw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.89.66 with SMTP id bm2mr6888361wib.6.1435091199061; Tue,
23 Jun 2015 13:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.137.38 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T2wsc=+seaWs=v5d_kPpC4u-xTnsjuPMO7PYhQN+0-KAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T2HegqOBqd1jijk1bZBE6N+NH8x6nfwbaoLBACVf8-WBQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20150623192838.GG30235@muck>
<CABsx9T2wsc=+seaWs=v5d_kPpC4u-xTnsjuPMO7PYhQN+0-KAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 22:26:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBj0Zk-k7fjams1YWFESDYHHp+r=NeFQAnVgghppNKDGxg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0444ec5b23f49a05193535e2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham 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] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
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: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:26:41 -0000
--f46d0444ec5b23f49a05193535e2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>
>> Wladimir noted that 'The original presented intention of block size
>> increase was a one-time "scaling" to grant time for more decentralizing
>> solutions to develop'
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>
> Consensus is that this process is too painful to go through once a year.
> I agree.
>
If you believe we will need to go through this process once a year, we are
not talking about a one-time scaling to grant time for more decentralizing
solutions. It means you think we should keep scaling. I don't disagree
there - as long as we're talking about scaling as availability of
bandwidth, storage and processing power increase, there is no reason
Bitcoin's blockchain can't grow proportionally.
However, an initial bump 8 MB and the growth rate afterwards seem more like
a no-effectively-limit-ever to me.
I fear that the wish of not wanting to deal with - admittedly - a very hard
problem, resulted here in throwing away several protections we currently
have. And yes, I know you believe 8 MB won't be created immediately. I
truly, honestly, do not think so either. But I prefer a system where I
don't need to rely on anyone's guesses for the future.
--
Pieter
--f46d0444ec5b23f49a05193535e2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Gavin Andresen <span dir=
=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">g=
avinandresen@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n: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 T=
ue, Jun 23, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Peter Todd <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank">pete@petertodd.org</a>></span=
> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0=
.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-s=
tyle:solid;padding-left:1ex">Wladimir noted that 'The original presente=
d intention of block size<br>
increase was a one-time "scaling" to grant time for more decentra=
lizing<br>
solutions to develop'<br>
<br>
Comments?<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Consensus is that this=
process is too painful to go through once a year.=C2=A0 I agree.<br></div>=
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If you believe we will n=
eed to go through this process once a year, we are not talking about a one-=
time scaling to grant time for more decentralizing solutions. It means you =
think we should keep scaling. I don't disagree there - as long as we=
9;re talking about scaling as availability of bandwidth, storage and proces=
sing power increase, there is no reason Bitcoin's blockchain can't =
grow proportionally.<br><br></div><div>However, an initial bump 8 MB and th=
e growth rate afterwards seem more like a no-effectively-limit-ever to me.<=
br><br></div><div>I fear that the wish of not wanting to deal with - admitt=
edly - a very hard problem, resulted here in throwing away several protecti=
ons we currently have. And yes, I know you believe 8 MB won't be create=
d immediately. I truly, honestly, do not think so either. But I prefer a sy=
stem where I don't need to rely on anyone's guesses for the future.=
<br><br>-- <br></div><div>Pieter<br><br></div></div><br></div></div>
--f46d0444ec5b23f49a05193535e2--
|
