summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/a5/9e13fc5be60ca6e6d3f4d71ddf7add9269c30b
blob: 31c11ba7c0d18d4e181a1635d36b8686964e153c (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <pw@vps7135.xlshosting.net>) id 1UyRyQ-0003XH-Cq
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from vps7135.xlshosting.net ([178.18.90.41])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1UyRyP-0001DB-Gu for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 +0000
Received: by vps7135.xlshosting.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 5FAA033CB93; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:28:39 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:28:39 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: John Dillon <john.dillon892@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <20130714192838.GA26941@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <CAPaL=UW4zXui8Jh-qaFgmfhbzhRSHNyh7U5MSJo2bHoWmtoCkA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPaL=UW4zXui8Jh-qaFgmfhbzhRSHNyh7U5MSJo2bHoWmtoCkA@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://sipa.ulyssis.org/pubkey.asc
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
	0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED   No valid author signature, adsp_override is
	CUSTOM_MED
	-0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain 1.2 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED    ADSP custom_med hit,
	and not from a mailing list
X-Headers-End: 1UyRyP-0001DB-Gu
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reward for P2SH IsStandard() patch.
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:28:46 -0000

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 07:05:26PM +0000, John Dillon wrote:
> Long-term we should be using P2SH with an inner OP_CHECKSIG for most addresses
> as it's a 1 byte savings. Change addresses can have this done first, although
> bitcoinj support will help so that satoshidice and similar sites can pay to
> P2SH change. As for multisig's P2SH overhead for a 1-of-2 and 2-of-2 and
> 3-of-3, is 10%, 8.6% and 6.2% respectively, all pretty minor, especially if you
> assume the blocksize limit will be raised.

Small comment: the current implementation in the reference client uses a custom
script encoder for the UTXO database, which stores every (valid) send-to-pubkey
as 33 bytes and every send-to-pubkeyhash or send-to-scripthash as 21 bytes.
So for "standard" address payment, there is no storage impact of using P2SH
instead.

-- 
Pieter