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
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
|
Return-Path: <natanael.l@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ABD4CFB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 2 Mar 2016 08:39:10 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC0FD10C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 2 Mar 2016 08:39:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id p65so67212194wmp.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 02 Mar 2016 00:39:08 -0800 (PST)
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; bh=050lFHxlXukFjKWNPCX+XxVJCBrtRmUoe70sb/AbYkc=;
b=MYcNYRKgrLeCFbqgAd7Wdkem7gxxRGg4Z2QfCzAI38E5IUPQBso7LiTLzu938EtY+K
U4+S52K75gmYpY3Pf94A7D/gsSikOJfnirI9kXVR7KVU7TqNA7367jcE5VskyJwLOpxX
blYznEj7EPQ98SYb7aWslnnzYapgZVX/v1lCBI2VAmR0UWe+9H7YWvfBrrnZP1Mt0DlX
NOtiY/YyL/O363x8aCItQrZY0SGG0LWLkAkxsKXcshDErciNauiw3TzXAakbTBZ1cd+w
X32JlK/v1bkxGl3tgGRuLUai3N2yGV+/Uvind5defWIKG0+dRXdrX/6H7LKvKTXmuDCp
4gQw==
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;
bh=050lFHxlXukFjKWNPCX+XxVJCBrtRmUoe70sb/AbYkc=;
b=nNRst86IXQdfBO77PjwAxnXB7wkFj8zhi2uFNUtiB1PQZcyu4pMZwgR+bYE9Q0rz9w
sgB7OFaIA5n3A1oz6sEv932+IPBaK8fVq093RfgSsPlS1fMlNANmEJ+mANZ2iQnyVIx4
0D8TVXU4GizJkJO5mzGiJqXVBs/k80ygyV/okxd3fe4sLI9RqMOiWTx8N5p+cr33EzE8
+GNzoHosUM9Ct2CUkAfOYJLIaRAgDxZcAkuCLU4fag3AfJUONmscwwOk/tS4tPN5Y8vL
iscJAxKAYjcVONuODnB8aMM4wpHoh8qXH6oTrZP4FFDmw34bu/izXzLzhWQAe52mAAgg
Jcow==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKDeJu8EiIMcVQ8kUJ+AQefUDCoxdGZ4nU7gjZ2uWGx0P5cQVEL+mgdlHYLvuLGG314wh3Etilvm/fciA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.0.86 with SMTP id 83mr3444009wma.63.1456907947452; Wed,
02 Mar 2016 00:39:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.23.195 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 00:39:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.23.195 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 00:39:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAPkFh0tx6BJ2=pCamtawa=niPfci7-a6Vs-wFo3rXXx6oks0Jg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPkFh0tx6BJ2=pCamtawa=niPfci7-a6Vs-wFo3rXXx6oks0Jg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 09:39:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAt2M197OWV1euFX5x+9A0K=0tTMamrTbXS=2KWX=ZKyPMyXAQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Emin_G=C3=BCn_Sirer?= <el33th4x0r@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113c8852adb045052d0cd0ed
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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 14:59:45 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Guarantees Strong, not Eventual,
Consistency.
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, 02 Mar 2016 08:39:10 -0000
--001a113c8852adb045052d0cd0ed
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To say that Bitcoin is strongly consistent is to say that the memory pool
and the last X blocks aren't part of Bitcoin. If you want to avoid making
that claim, you can at best argue that Bitcoin has both a strongly
consistent component AND an eventually consistent component.
The entire point of the definition of eventually consistency is that your
computer system is running continously and DO NOT have a final state, and
therefore you must be able to describe the behavior when your system either
may give responses to queries across time that are either perfectly
consistent *or not* perfectly consistent.
And Bitcoin by default *does not* ignore the contents of the last X blocks.
A Bitcoin node being queried about the current blockchain state WILL give
inconsistent answers when there's block rearrangements =3D no strong
consistency. Not to mention that your definition ignores the nonzero
probability of a block rearrangement extending beyond your constant omega.
Bitcoin provides a probabilistic, accumulative probability. Not a perfect
one.
Den 2 mar 2016 04:04 skrev "Emin G=C3=BCn Sirer" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>
> There seems to be a perception out there that Bitcoin is eventually
> consistent. I wrote this post to describe why this perception is complete=
ly
> false.
>
> Bitcoin Guarantees Strong, not Eventual, Consistency
>
> http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/03/01/bitcoin-guarantees-strong-not-ev=
entual-consistency/
>
> I hope we can lay this bad meme to rest. Bitcoin provides a strong
> guarantee.
> - egs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--001a113c8852adb045052d0cd0ed
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr">To say that Bitcoin is strongly consistent is to say that th=
e memory pool and the last X blocks aren't part of Bitcoin. If you want=
to avoid making that claim, you can at best argue that Bitcoin has both a =
strongly consistent component AND an eventually consistent component. </p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">The entire point of the definition of eventually consistency=
is that your computer system is running continously and DO NOT have a fina=
l state, and therefore you must be able to describe the behavior when your =
system either may give responses to queries across time that are either per=
fectly consistent *or not* perfectly consistent.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">And Bitcoin by default *does not* ignore the contents of the=
last X blocks. A Bitcoin node being queried about the current blockchain s=
tate WILL give inconsistent answers when there's block rearrangements =
=3D no strong consistency. Not to mention that your definition ignores the =
nonzero probability of a block rearrangement extending beyond your constant=
omega. </p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Bitcoin provides a probabilistic, accumulative probability. =
Not a perfect one. </p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">Den 2 mar 2016 04:04 skrev "Emin G=C3=BCn S=
irer" <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bit=
coin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>>:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc =
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div>There seems to be a perce=
ption out there that Bitcoin is eventually consistent. I wrote this post to=
describe why this perception is completely false.=C2=A0</div><div><br></di=
v><div><div>Bitcoin Guarantees Strong, not Eventual, Consistency</div></div=
><div><a href=3D"http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/03/01/bitcoin-guarantee=
s-strong-not-eventual-consistency/" target=3D"_blank">http://hackingdistrib=
uted.com/2016/03/01/bitcoin-guarantees-strong-not-eventual-consistency/</a>=
<br></div><div><br></div><div>I hope we can lay this bad meme to rest. Bitc=
oin provides a strong guarantee.</div><div>- egs</div><div><br></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>
--001a113c8852adb045052d0cd0ed--
|
