Can you handle 8MB blocks?

[Was]

Hello all!

Hope you all have been well since I last posted.

I've been dealing with anxiety regarding the notion that if we aren't able to deal with an issue as simple and laid out as the Block-size, and cannot collaborate as a community in an organized manner, perhaps our financial system is destined to be ruled by central authorities forever.

This kind of thing taking place within the community, which in some cases, vaguely resembles one at all (/r/bitcoin) really troubles me because I feel like decentralized financial technologies can end the status quo of impoverished countries that are so due to fiat currencies....along with all the other mind-blowing implications.

I guess being taken advantage of is the compromise of being arrogant and in some cases, apathetic.

I was checking out my download/upload speed today on  speedtest.net 
Turns out I can download at around 23megabits per second. Which equates to around 2.5MB a second.

At 2.5MB/sec, you can download 8MB in 3.2 seconds, which means I should be able to run a full node in the event that blocks consistently were full in the next two years post-XT. If my bandwidth stays the same, I should also be able to relay 16MB blocks within 6.4seconds.
I was looking for some input from the community on what your download speeds were, and what region you run your node (if you run one)...

It looks like the majority of nodes are in the US, and the majority of nodes in the US are on the east coast, which is also where I am...

P.S My ISP is Verizon Fios

Thanks for reading

Was

[1714547821]

1714547821

[1714547821]

1714547821

[Was]

Here's a link to my result on Speedtest. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4596020657

30 people have seen this and not one has provided whether or not they'd be compatible with BIP101 in the long term?

Im just looking for input on whether this is a feasible proposal for full node operators in the short and long term.

was

[Quickseller]

My full node is hosted with Ramnode

When I try to run a speed test from the Speedtest server farthest from where my VPS is located:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 3172
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by NODE1 Internet (Geraldton) [18192.06 km]: 378.34 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 29.68 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 9.03 Mbit/s

When I run a speedtest from a Speedtest server in South Africa:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1714
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by iSPACE (Durban) [13929.62 km]: 485.918 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 12.75 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 7.30 Mbit/s

When running a speedtest from a speedtest server in China

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 3891
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Unicom-GZ (Guangzhou) [13515.28 km]: 253.523 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 24.85 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 3.89 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a Speedtest server in Japan:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 6463
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by j416dy (Kusatsu) [11388.19 km]: 262.859 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 89.39 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 13.58 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Russia:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 5259
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Proxima (Voskresensk) [8785.44 km]: 190.911 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 108.31 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 14.37 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Germany:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1973
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by DegNet GmbH (Deggendorf) [7769.97 km]: 171.075 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 164.51 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 19.61 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Brazil:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 5574
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by JET INTERNET (Silvania) [6673.86 km]: 268.13 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 76.13 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 14.94 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in the UK:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1149
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Datatech UK Ltd (Birmingham) [6648.49 km]: 191.132 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 27.49 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 15.17 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Victoria, BC (Canada):

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 4240
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Shaw Communications (Victoria, BC) [3690.12 km]: 140.968 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 140.94 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 37.78 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Portland, OR:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1780
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Comcast (Portland, OR) [3576.59 km]: 93.086 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 68.98 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 34.59 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Boston, MA:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1774
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Comcast (Boston, MA) [1532.78 km]: 39.1 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 234.07 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 72.42 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from a speedtest server in Atlanta, GA:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli --server 1767
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Hosted by Comcast (Atlanta, GA) [97.03 km]: 3.012 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 882.98 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 447.93 Mbit/s

Running a speedtest from the "best" speedtest server based on latency:

quickseller@quickseller1:~$ speedtest-cli              
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Testing from RamNode LLC (107.191.101.111)...
Selecting best server based on latency...
Hosted by Colo@ (Atlanta, GA) [97.03 km]: 2.203 ms
Testing download speed........................................
Download: 839.45 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed..................................................
Upload: 534.26 Mbit/s

I think the risk of double spends when accepting 0/unconfirmed transactions would increase slightly, however it is already a bad idea to accept 0/unconfirmed transactions due to RBF (and other reasons). Also the orphan rate would probably increase somewhat as well causing 1 confirmation to be somewhat less reliable (although it would be difficult to do something malicious when a transaction is confirmed on an orphaned block unless an attacker has a substantial amount of resources).

tl;dr - yes

[mezzomix]

The question is not can you handle 8MB blocks every 10 minutes, the question is can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes in 2016 and a doubling every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

[Quickseller]

The question is not can you 8MB blocks every 10 minutes but can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes that doubles every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

I am pretty sure that my 56.6 kbs dial up connection that I had in 1999 would not be able to handle 1 MB blocks every 10 minutes. My current ~7 mbs connection can handle 1 MB blocks every 10 minutes (and would be able to handle 8 MB blocks).

I am sure that technology will continue to advance over time so that faster speeds will be supported. If it does not then the protocol can be soft forked to slow down the increases in max block size increases.

[Was]

The question is not can you handle 8MB blocks every 10 minutes, the question is can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes in 2016 and a doubling every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

well, we're talking 20 years from now, of course. We can cross that bridge when we come to it. My guess would be, yes, according to Moore's law.

Was

[Come-from-Beyond]

The question is not can you handle 8MB blocks every 10 minutes, the question is can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes in 2016 and a doubling every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

What about transaction validation? Signature, etc. Is there no bottleneck in processing power?

[Was]

Just put it this way, a lot more processing power that could ever be used to relay transactions and verify them on full nodes is already being used to mine because of the financial incentive.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Just put it this way, a lot more processing power that could ever be used to relay transactions and verify them on full nodes is already being used to mine because of the financial incentive.

No. CPU is not used for mining and ASICs can't be used for transaction verification.

[Was]

CPUs are used to relay the blocks that are found and to control the ASICs. In addition, Bitcoin Core uses 0.1% CPU max on my computer, even with my node running, my CPU is throttled to it's lowest voltage/speed on my laptop. I also cannot assume that if blocks were 10MB each, that it would take my computer 1%.

I have an intel 3610qm ( intel i7 2.3Ghz up to 3.3Ghz) but i always wonder how if we have 1000 transactions a second one day how large the tx cache will be

[cbeast]

Wow, 8MB! Is this 1989?

[bahamapascal]

The question is not can you handle 8MB blocks every 10 minutes, the question is can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes in 2016 and a doubling every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

So a one Megabyte Block can hold about 2000 transactions I belive.

Lets take 2000 Transactions * 8000, that is 16 000 000 Transactions in 10 min. If we divide that by 10 and by 60 (16 000 000 / 10 /60) we get 26 666 Transactions per second!

Visa has an average of 2000 Transactions per second.


I think, even if Bitcoin will go mainstream and is used for everything, we won't be seeing 8GB Blocks by 2036

[PolarPoint]

Is not about me or you able to handle 8M blocks. It's the miners who are the key players.

Users can handle large blocks because we are not mining, just downloading. Blocksize is crucial to miners. They want small blocks so they download and verify blocks quicker and start mining the next block. They want to upload a mined block fast to reduce chance of the block being orphaned.

[mezzomix]

I think, even if Bitcoin will go mainstream and is used for everything, we won't be seeing 8GB Blocks by 2036

Maybe some idiots are doing "stress tests"...

[Ducky1]

Im in Norway, and have a relatively standard connection at home, download 30 Mbit / upload 10Mbit, so no problem. At work I have 1GBit, but running Bitcoin nodes is not an option.

[Ducky1]

The question is not can you handle 8MB blocks every 10 minutes, the question is can you handle 8MB blocks all 10 minutes in 2016 and a doubling every 2 years!

So you should ask the question can you handle 8GB (Gigabyte!) blocks every 10 minutes in 2036!

So, 2036 is roughly 20 years from now. How was the speed 20 years ago (1995)? It was around 28.8 kbit/sec for me. So, the speed has increased by a factor of 1000 to 30mbit/sec in 20 years. It the same trend continues we should have speeds of roughly 30GBit/sec in 2036. So, again, no problem. For my work thats' also almost true. Back in -95 we had a speed of 1-10 mbit/sec, now we have 1 Gbit.

[mezzomix]

1995 was pre-internet for most people but the network interfaces were at 10 MBit/s. In 2005 most networks had 100 MBit/s a lot of them had already 1 GBit/s. Today most of the networks have ... still 1 GBit/s.

But we do not need a factor of 10-100 in twenty years, we need a factor of 1000! This means our computers must use a 1 TBit/s connection in 2036, a 500 GBit/s connection in 2026, a 250 GBit/s connection in 2021 and a 100 GBit/s connection in about two years.

[fronti]

1995 was pre-internet for most people but the network interfaces were at 10 MBit/s. In 2005 most networks had 100 MBit/s a lot of them had already 1 GBit/s. Today most of the networks have ... still 1 GBit/s.

But we do not need a factor of 10-100 in twenty years, we need a factor of 1000! This means our computers must use a 1 TBit/s connection in 2036, a 500 GBit/s connection in 2026, a 250 GBit/s connection in 2021 and a 100 GBit/s connection in about two years.

also don't forget CPU power to verify the blocks.
This need to increase also a lot.

[mezzomix]

also don't forget CPU power to verify the blocks.
This need to increase also a lot.

too bad: http://gizmodo.com/intels-2016-chip-line-up-will-put-moores-law-on-hold-1718177275

[Ducky1]

1995 was pre-internet for most people but the network interfaces were at 10 MBit/s. In 2005 most networks had 100 MBit/s a lot of them had already 1 GBit/s. Today most of the networks have ... still 1 GBit/s.

But we do not need a factor of 10-100 in twenty years, we need a factor of 1000! This means our computers must use a 1 TBit/s connection in 2036, a 500 GBit/s connection in 2026, a 250 GBit/s connection in 2021 and a 100 GBit/s connection in about two years.

I don't really understand your argument here. Internet speeds are what matters for Bitcoin, not network interface speed as long as it's far higher than internet speed for the wast majority. In 20 years interface speeds will be either 100Gbit or 1000 Gbit. Both of them are plenty fast for bitcoin.