Bitcoin Forum
November 14, 2024, 11:25:08 AM *
News: Check out the artwork 1Dq created to commemorate this forum's 15th anniversary
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The classic roadmap  (Read 352 times)
Jet Cash (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2828
Merit: 2472


https://JetCash.com


View Profile WWW
February 28, 2016, 09:04:08 AM
 #1

I started to read the classic roadmap, but I turned off early on when I read this -
Quote
Technical TODO for scaling up

    Implement parallel validation of blocks. Currently Core does block validation one block at a time (the cs_main lock is held during validation). Allowing blocks to be validated in parallel means a slower-to-validate block is more likely to lose the "block race" to a faster-to-validate block.

    Implement "headers-first" mining. As soon as a valid 80-byte block header that extends the most-work chain is received, relay the header (via a new p2p network message) and allow mining an empty block on top of it, for up to 20 seconds. When it is fully validated, mine a normal block. If a faster-to-validate block that extends the most-work chain is received and validated first (see parallel validation, above), mine on top of the faster-to-validate block. If full block data has not been received within a reasonable number of seconds (e.g. 30 seconds), fall back to mining on the last fully-validated block.

I'm pretty set against classic, but I thought I should read the roadmap in case I am wrong. However, on reading this, I got the impression that they wanted 2Mb blocks, but then they want faster validation and confirmation, so they are encouraging miners to produce empty or low density blocks. This seems to be completely contrary to what is needed  to help Bitcoin grow.

Please tell me why I am wrong (if I am wrong).

Offgrid campers allow you to enjoy life and preserve your health and wealth.
Save old Cars - my project to save old cars from scrapage schemes, and to reduce the sale of new cars.
My new Bitcoin transfer address is - bc1q9gtz8e40en6glgxwk4eujuau2fk5wxrprs6fys
chek2fire
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 1142


Intergalactic Conciliator


View Profile
February 28, 2016, 05:07:49 PM
 #2

I am not supporter at all of Classic and to their bitcoin blockchain split propose. But i think empty blocks is not a problem to bitcoin network because then we will have and lower orphan blocks.

http://www.bitcoin-gr.org
4411 804B 0181 F444 ADBD 01D4 0664 00E4 37E7 228E
thejaytiesto
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 1014


View Profile
February 28, 2016, 05:32:55 PM
 #3

Well considering that most of their roadmap consist on copy-pasting Core's dev team code and then changing a couple of things up that are always a big tradeoff against decentralization and privacy, I understand that anyone paying attention and putting things in context is going to be disappointed with Classic.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!