All-time transaction record was just hit

[evoorhees]

http://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

Now, this is actually misleading, because the vast majority of the huge spike in the past couple days was SatoshiDice.com. But, numbers are numbers and we just hit the all time Bitcoin transaction record The transactions are actually real people placing real bets, so I guess they are legitimate for the transaction count, right?

To Piuk (blockchain.info owner), I might suggest you make an additional transactions chart like the above but remove all transactions to or from the 1dice addresses.

[1714205891]

1714205891

[1714205891]

1714205891

[1714205891]

1714205891

[1714205891]

1714205891

[1714205891]

1714205891

[cypherdoc]

The transactions are actually real people placing real bets, so I guess they are legitimate for the transaction count, right?

shame on you.  of course they're legitimate.  these are real ppl using real Bitcoins for a real purpose.

[GoWest]

I'd say the value of daily transactions is more important.  http://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd

[cypherdoc]

well, a currency has to start somewhere and its very good news that the absolute # of tx's is going up like that.  at this pt we just want ppl to use them and create a monetary velocity.

[bpd]

Isn't there a 1000-txn per block limit in place? Seems like satoshidice could cause that to be hit very quickly.

[cypherdoc]

Bitcoin looks alot healthier than this:

[Explodicle]

Isn't there a 1000-txn per block limit in place? Seems like satoshidice could cause that to be hit very quickly.

Then maybe people will start paying fees.

[evoorhees]

Isn't there a 1000-txn per block limit in place? Seems like satoshidice could cause that to be hit very quickly.

I've never heard of such a thing, but it would be pretty silly. That would mean only 144,000 transactions could happen in a day if they happened perfectly evenly. Not suitable for a currency that will take over the world

[cypherdoc]

Isn't there a 1000-txn per block limit in place? Seems like satoshidice could cause that to be hit very quickly.

that can't be right.

[CIYAM]

Isn't there a 1000-txn per block limit in place? Seems like satoshidice could cause that to be hit very quickly.

Isn't the limit 1 MB of tx data rather than x # of tx's?

[bpd]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees says it's 500KB per block. May be out of date.

Block http://blockchain.info/block-index/217018/0000000000000189d250023b778a2f8e6f45b5d5e4de8fa79b7854aabd1af95b is 293KB with 810 transactions, 677 of which are due to satoshidice

[cypherdoc]

theymos says there a max of 1MB data per block

[cypherdoc]

from theymos:

http://blockexplorer.com/q/avgtxsize

Bitcoin uses decimal megabytes and the block header is included in the byte count, so the max number of transactions assuming a size of 449 would be (1000000-80)/449=2226.

[theymos]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees says it's 500KB per block. May be out of date.

500KB is the soft limit, which can be increased easily. 1MB is the "hard" limit, which is more difficult to increase.

[cypherdoc]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees says it's 500KB per block. May be out of date.

500KB is the soft limit, which can be increased easily. 1MB is the "hard" limit, which is more difficult to increase.

but tell them what you told me in the pm.  its important for them to know that the tx's per block can be increased as was planned for by Satoshi.

[theymos]

but tell them what you told me in the pm.  its important for them to know that the tx's per block can be increased as was planned for by Satoshi.

Yeah, the 1MB max block size is an arbitrary limit meant to stop the chain size from expanding too quickly. The technical limit is much higher (probably at least a million transactions). Satoshi planned to increase the max block size when legitimate transaction volume made it necessary. This requires everyone to upgrade, but it can be rolled out over several years, so it's not a huge issue. Probably some other chain-forking change will be necessary before it becomes a problem.

The current average transaction count per block is ~60, so we're far from the limit.

[highlevelminer]

Lol looks like mining is no longer profitable.

Nice info theymos

[Stephen Gornick]

Here are some totals for these addresses:

Wager             BTC   Trxs
lessthan 1          8   2768
lessthan 2          0    104
lessthan 4          1   1126
lessthan 8          1     56
lessthan 16         1     82
lessthan 32         1     44
lessthan 64         5    160
lessthan 128       40    260
lessthan 256        3     42
lessthan 512        9    278
lessthan 1000       8    248
lessthan 1500       3     64
lessthan 2000      10    152
lessthan 3000      14     98
lessthan 4000      10    142
lessthan 6000      20    266
lessthan 8000      41    570
lessthan 12000     69    478
lessthan 16000    157   1458
lessthan 24000    719   1602
lessthan 32000    537   3897
lessthan 32768  1,018   4004
lessthan 48000    468   2387
lessthan 64000    245    790

Total BTCs wagered: 3,387 BTC
Total number of wagers (transactions): 21,076
Total transactions on the blockchain: 42,152
Average wager: 0.16 BTC

[MarketNeutral]

Lol looks like mining is no longer profitable.

Nice info theymos

Are you telling me I should shut down my cpu rig? Never! 

[randomproof]

1) One transaction can actually contain many real transactions. Look at how most mining pools pay-out.  One input to many outputs.

2) Wouldn't a large number of transactions increase the changes of messing with the merkle-tree hash?