Bitcoin Forum
January 27, 2022, 03:38:28 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 22.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Record breaking block: 363270  (Read 1189 times)
jl2012
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1010


View Profile
July 01, 2015, 04:13:43 AM
 #1

https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000010ef3011e77078522451782c639ea5e22492e086ca9089c3

This block has 4509 tx with exactly 1,000,000 bytes, both are new record. It is also the only block with more than 4000 tx

Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1643297908
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1643297908

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1643297908
Reply with quote  #2

1643297908
Report to moderator
1643297908
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1643297908

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1643297908
Reply with quote  #2

1643297908
Report to moderator
1643297908
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1643297908

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1643297908
Reply with quote  #2

1643297908
Report to moderator
el kaka22
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2688
Merit: 1128


www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
July 01, 2015, 04:24:54 AM
 #2

It is because the stress test is in progress and block 363266 is an empty block, making many tx stuck there... BTW today will be a memorable day because of this record, stating that bitcoin is at a new level!

████  ███████  ███
██████████
███      ███████
███      ███████████
██████████████████
████████
███   ████  ███████████
███ ███████████████
█████████
█████████████████
███  ███████
██████████████
███        ████████
███████████▀▀███▀▀███████████
██████▀▀     ███     ▀▀██████
████▀   ▄▄█████████▄▄   ▀████
████▄▄▄███▀  ▀█▀  ▀███▄▄▄████
██▀▀▀██▀      ▀      ▀██▀▀▀██
█▀  ▄██               ██▄  ▀█
█   ████▄▄         ▄▄████   █
█▄  ▀██▀             ▀██▀  ▄█
██▄▄▄██▄             ▄██▄▄▄██
████▀▀▀███▄ ▄█ █▄ ▄███▀▀▀████
████▄   ▀▀███▄█████▀▀   ▄████
███████▄     ███     ▄███████
███████████▄▄███▄▄███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
..PLAY NOW..
███  ███████  ████
██████████
███████      ███
███████████      ███
██████████████████
████████
███████████  ████   ███
███████████████ ███
█████████
█████████████████
███████  ███
██████████████
████████        ███
unamis76
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1001


View Profile
July 01, 2015, 02:24:51 PM
 #3

Each and every day, new reminders that block size is indeed an issue, and that it must be solved in near future with raising the blocksize...
trout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 334
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 01, 2015, 03:17:51 PM
 #4

it's a  weird block.
there are a lot of 0 fee transactions, like this one
which in addition are shown as Doublespends by blockchain.info


why did F2Pool chose to mine these? may be someone found a bug in f2pool and is using
it to doublespend, that is, to cancel some other (unconfirmed) transactions they are sending at the same time
Just a wild guess.
Mikestang
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 01, 2015, 04:39:27 PM
 #5

Each and every day, new reminders that block size is indeed an issue, and that it must be solved in near future with raising the blocksize...

And more examples of why empty blocks are bad for the network and provide no worth.
amaclin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1015


View Profile
July 02, 2015, 08:18:57 AM
 #6

why did F2Pool chose to mine these?
f2pool mines some non-standard transactions and the outputs to compromised addresses for themselves
 
InceptionCoin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 02, 2015, 09:38:04 AM
 #7

Each and every day, new reminders that block size is indeed an issue, and that it must be solved in near future with raising the blocksize...

And more examples of why empty blocks are bad for the network and provide no worth.
Its not about bad and good, its about liberty.

Skilled C++ and Python programmer. Looking around to create solid longterm coin by myself. Do you have any ideas? Feel free to PM me.
BTSE
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 02, 2015, 11:55:56 AM
 #8

why did F2Pool chose to mine these?
f2pool mines some non-standard transactions and the outputs to compromised addresses for themselves
 

f2pool does indeed mine some non-standard transactions, but this does not lead to them 'comrpomising' any addresses or outputs. Non-standard transactions are those that bitcoin core rejects for being spammy, or for using restricted opcodes that are deemed a 'security risk'. (I never understood this logic).
lontivero
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 164
Merit: 119

Amazing times are coming


View Profile
July 03, 2015, 04:38:32 AM
 #9

Each and every day, new reminders that block size is indeed an issue, and that it must be solved in near future with raising the blocksize...

And more examples of why empty blocks are bad for the network and provide no worth.
Its not about bad and good, its about liberty.

It isn't about liberty, it is about following the protocol and one day empty blocks could being disallowed by consensus. If one of the biggest miners decides to mine only empty blocks, it could delay transactions and even when it is clear miners don't want to mishandle the network, it could happen.
¡
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 03, 2015, 06:14:13 AM
 #10

f2pool does indeed mine some non-standard transactions, but this does not lead to them 'comrpomising' any addresses or outputs. Non-standard transactions are those that bitcoin core rejects for being spammy, or for using restricted opcodes that are deemed a 'security risk'. (I never understood this logic).

Some of the Bitcoin opcodes were genuinely dangerous and were permanently disabled to prevent the network imploding. The way they were implemented meant you could have made scripts that are impossible for anybody to verify, and any node that tried would have crashed out due to not having yottabytes of memory. There is no possibility of them coming back, but new opcodes that have the same function could be created in the future if really necessary.

The scripting standardness tests are from pretty early on, but they are still around today because ultimately the scripting language isn't as useful as anybody would have liked. You can make annoying scripts and scripts that break reimplementations in spectacular ways, but very little in the way of useful ones outside of the standard set. A majority of the opcodes have never once been used in any script in the 5+ year history of Bitcoin transactions, and nobody seems to be campaigning for them to be freely relayed again.

It isn't about liberty, it is about following the protocol and one day empty blocks could being disallowed by consensus. If one of the biggest miners decides to mine only empty blocks, it could delay transactions and even when it is clear miners don't want to mishandle the network, it could happen.

That will not, and can not ever become a consensus rule. If you try to make 0 transaction blocks invalid, the miner will just pack in junk to make up the limit. It is also completely plausible that there will be times of zero transaction volume which you need to contend with.
lontivero
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 164
Merit: 119

Amazing times are coming


View Profile
July 03, 2015, 06:35:41 AM
 #11

Quote
It isn't about liberty, it is about following the protocol and one day empty blocks could being disallowed by consensus. If one of the biggest miners decides to mine only empty blocks, it could delay transactions and even when it is clear miners don't want to mishandle the network, it could happen.

That will not, and can not ever become a consensus rule. If you try to make 0 transaction blocks invalid, the miner will just pack in junk to make up the limit. It is also completely plausible that there will be times of zero transaction volume which you need to contend with.

Yes, that's right, miners could pack junk. +1
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!