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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 822A3990
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:43:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-yk0-f169.google.com (mail-yk0-f169.google.com
[209.85.160.169])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F1EBFD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:43:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ykdv3 with SMTP id v3so113210649ykd.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=jtimon_cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=yf7+rXR+f5KSJtJ7cGuQ8tXAmiySAjMrn48XUSnB8io=;
b=Y/Ctcm2HSGPbEhxmBP2x7l1oYafe/B5zF0ctavyGJTuFAeDI+IZaYSCdGK6bus1Bdp
EVrH3msDqWPUcDzJMfkK+h222n4uXs/iq4mNq5Pj3huEJ6ei9gbl1XQIcGMhS0Xw/DyW
a6drlz6VbXx7Ukf2XoKjLw88ZnJvIlll7+7H7arDzjE0lrgFn70RBhforLaLk56ytbrg
9cVQCpGBeO0/cnRtBd6uiBYjomv1xeMDQYjfrQWbcZYm01li+DZOMT5bD6z1WlBWavI7
zZj4V5ye328OuAZGqAJzzTudBQrIE/KlV0FeLkYQtxSHjynEtkcUpZE4LLSQ1UMOPTfk
jbaQ==
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=yf7+rXR+f5KSJtJ7cGuQ8tXAmiySAjMrn48XUSnB8io=;
b=F9EW++2m9QOQNn6ZHQHxRBKQafOwf4GEOKmLGrQrEndaIPkX/4OkcH1dPBD9J0H7+Z
hYmugfh2mSn23fY+xIxxU4u3DqmC/QFnHuOLXf2M7EUBuGPHy69lUbAssY5qOtYDCl94
oWCkSH58UZGsdQXro/Xr0ZRolMMfZB9eg9QATKmgz+a8oo6IeO6sV/rVJZiq+Cdx1ipa
hO2kbAJyZ5/FIYiN+9gYKirND0DN2cTxqUmSQS1de0OKwgwRROpWtw8OGbdRVDdl+1m+
22zwsmaXo3PXPRx17/gcpLDexiVTUv7LyaSkKhG2RrA3e+uLUBr8NlqGjvh68m4oAybO
fp7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkHDBGYAX4isZk/vYxoWbvOp//LOAh8fjzKaxOkUkvQLxJYtVkRmH1DyLYAUKrN5huEOjc6
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.129.111.3 with SMTP id k3mr15356951ywc.53.1447360997381;
Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.132.147 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201511122012.29966.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <5644ECE6.9090304@mattcorallo.com>
<201511122012.29966.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 21:43:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqnmR5eAEZj_CRJ6Q5gi8LM_chb3tBCt2=L9ojr+Ziadw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Upcoming Transaction Priority Changes
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: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:43:18 -0000
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 12, 2015 7:47:50 PM Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> * Mining code will use starting priority for ease of implementation
>
> This should be optional, at least for 0.12.
The ease of implementation is not gained if it's maintained optionally.
>> * Default block priority size will be 0
>
> We should not be influencing miner policy by changing defaults.
I agree changing policy defaults is meaningless, but in this case it
is supposed to signal deprecation of the policy option.
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Chun Wang via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I would think about to merge the priority, feerate, and probably
> sigoprate into one number, probably 576 priorities trade for 1 satoshi
> per kb?
I am in favor of having customizable cost (currently tx size but it
has been proposed to also include sigoprate) and reward (currently
feerate). The main problem I see for keep maintaining the code is that
priority is not integrated in the reward function and cannot easily be
with its current functionality unchanged (which slows down other very
necessary improvements in the mempool limits).
|
