Blocksize needs to be increased now.

[hv_]

Very nice and informal graph, hopefully an agreement is reached soon to increase the blocksize limit. It's
not good for the health of the Bitcoin that everybody keeps fighting over it and nothing is being done at
the ever increasing confirmation times when normal fees are being used.

Best would be to have a moving agerage + 50% or so  size limit, than its dynamic.

[tommorisonwebdesign]

I've been noticing these slow transactions as well. It will affect the price of bitcoin is they don't increase the memory pool. We've seen the price drop over Bitcoin XT before.  I would say that graph predicts the future quite accurately. It worth investing in Bitcoin now.

[Hirose UK]

We are reaching the blocksize limit fast and delays in confirming transactions with standards fees is becoming noticeable. A consensus needs to be found quickly otherwise Bitcoin is going to choke in unconfirmed transactions soon.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&timespan=all&scale=1&address=

because of the limit, there will be so many unconfirmed transactions. it's not good. hope there'll be solution soon

[Jet Cash]

We are reaching the blocksize limit fast and delays in confirming transactions with standards fees is becoming noticeable. A consensus needs to be found quickly otherwise Bitcoin is going to choke in unconfirmed transactions soon.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&timespan=all&scale=1&address=

because of the limit, there will be so many unconfirmed transactions. it's not good. hope there'll be solution soon

I wonder how they created that chart. Given the reports of empty blocks, and blocks with under 512k, to get to that final figure, I would expect some blocks to be over 1.5Mb. I understand that this is not possible atm.

[AlexGR]

Switch to linear scale instead of logarithmic (button on the lower right).

[hv_]

Just found... No Space left for the poor or any safety...

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

[M1hae1]

Hi guys!
I'm new to the blocksize debate. I have one question though (please excuse me if it is stupid or if it was already ecplained).
Why is there only blockSIZE debate and not a blockTIME debate? If I understand the concept correctly, time can be manipulated without any hardforks.
Thanks for your answer(s)!

[sturle]

Blockchain.info is posting > 36 MB of unconfirmed transactions right now.

That's nothing.  Blockchain.info must do some kind of filtering.  I have 437 MB of unconfirmed transactions in my mempool.  Average fee is 1.05 satoshi/byte, i.e. nothing to worry about.  Keeping the mempool artificially large by spamming free transactions is free, and doesn't impact conformation time of any normal transactions.  Keeping blocks full is free as well.  This is a non-issue.

[mrvision]

"640K ought to be enough for anybody." Bill Gates

[iCEBREAKER]

Blocksize will be increased eventually.  But sorry, Not Tonight Dear.

[AliceGored]

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

Didn't you know? Being expensive is your greatest advantage against budding competitors...

People will pay more for the sanctity of decentralization embodied by four giant chinese chicken coops.

[iCEBREAKER]

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

Didn't you know? Being expensive is your greatest advantage against budding competitors...

People will pay more for the sanctity of decentralization embodied by four giant chinese chicken coops.

Bitfury?  Not Chinese.
KnC?  Not Chinese either.
21e6?  Again, not Chinese.
Spondoolies?  Chinese!  Oh wait no, still not Chinese.

Why don't you wait until we get to an AMD/Intel/Nvidia type oligopoly before you starting fretting about Yellow Peril.

[AliceGored]

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

Didn't you know? Being expensive is your greatest advantage against budding competitors...

People will pay more for the sanctity of decentralization embodied by four giant chinese chicken coops.

Bitfury?  Not Chinese.
KnC?  Not Chinese either.
21e6?  Again, not Chinese.
Spondoolies?  Chinese!  Oh wait no, still not Chinese.

Why don't you wait until we get to an AMD/Intel/Nvidia type oligopoly before you starting fretting about Yellow Peril.

Bitfury 9.74%
KnC 3.8% mining classic blocks exclusively
21 Don't even register... solved a block days ago?
Spoondoolies  That Guy who wants to change the PoW? do they have a pool?

[iCEBREAKER]

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

Didn't you know? Being expensive is your greatest advantage against budding competitors...

People will pay more for the sanctity of decentralization embodied by four giant chinese chicken coops.

Bitfury?  Not Chinese.
KnC?  Not Chinese either.
21e6?  Again, not Chinese.
Spondoolies?  Chinese!  Oh wait no, still not Chinese.

Why don't you wait until we get to an AMD/Intel/Nvidia type oligopoly before you starting fretting about Yellow Peril.

Bitfury 9.74%
KnC 3.8% mining classic blocks exclusively
21 Don't even register... solved a block days ago?
Spoondoolies  That Guy who wants to change the PoW? do they have a pool?

Don't worry, the Evil Chinese aren't going to kill Honey Badger.

http://www.coindesk.com/bitfury-details-100-million-georgia-data-center/
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/kncminer/funding-rounds
http://www.coindesk.com/21-record-116-million-funding-all-star-investors/
http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/spondoolies-tech-gets-5-million-in-series-b-funding-aiming-for-16-nm-asic-in-2015/

[RealBitcoin]

Only 700 unconfirmed transaction now.

I feel like every day its getting smaller and smaller, I dont see any evidence that its getting too big.

Just many shills thats all.

[MeteoImpact]

Only 700 unconfirmed transaction now.

You are correct that this issue isn't nearly as pressing as supporters of immediate blocksize increases would suggest, but it is untrue that there is no backlog of unconfirmed transactions; any node running 0.12.0 should easily be able to max out its mempool with unconfirmed transactions, many of which will likely never confirm. This is true at 1MB blocks, would be true at 2MB blocks, and potentially at ANY block size because, as sturle stated, it is FREE to spam the network with free transactions (or transactions which will never confirm, as these are never actually spent). I run a Core node and have lowered my mempool limit to 100MB to just catch the, "upper crust", of transactions--there would be a lot more if I left the limit higher (300MB is the default). At the moment, this is the report of the getmempoolinfo call:

{
  "size": 4172,
  "bytes": 44798273,
  "usage": 96574336,
  "maxmempool": 100000000,
  "mempoolminfee": 0.00001183
}

The min fee under which my node will not relay transactions is 0.00001183BTC/kB; this is extremely close to the default required fee of 0.00001 and seriously a non-issue. I've seen my mempoolminfee hit about 0.00002, but that's about it. Granted, transactions still may not confirm at these fee rates, but that should be understandable considering how low these fees actually are. I tested sending a couple transactions at very low fees within the last couple weeks, one with a fee rate of ~0.00005BTC/kB, which took about 20 hours to confirm, and one at ~0.00007777BTC/kB, which confirmed in two blocks. Core's floating estimates generally suggest a minimum fee hovering around ~0.0002BTC/kB, so if you use anything that makes similar estimates (I know Mycelium also does something similar), there should be no issues getting your transactions to confirm.

EDIT: Just sent a tx at ~0.000051BTC/kB; it confirmed in the next block.

[zimmah]

Just found... No Space left for the poor or any safety...

And no Space left for any potential next Level adoption jump as well , so stay nichy for any sake.

By the time the blocksizes becomes large like that the advance in technology would cause almost everyone to have internet speed and hard drive sizes that would make even 130Mb/s look like a joke.

We can't limit ourselves by worrying about the size of the blockchain in 5/10 years because by then the hard drives would be orders of magnitude cheaper than today anyway, and so would internet speed.

We need bigger blocks.

[traspy]

mempool it isn't full now. unfortunatelly bitcoin is under Blockstream hands.
bitcoinfork will happen lately.

[X7]

The sheer amount of comments about this topic, from people who know little or nothing - gives me a headache.  Learn from the Ethereum hard fork please - that had more consensus than this does and observe what happened. Mainstream media don't even discuss Ethereum, the press Bitcoin would get - would set it back years in the minds of the tech scared.

[Wind_FURY]

We are reaching the blocksize limit fast and delays in confirming transactions with standards fees is becoming noticeable. A consensus needs to be found quickly otherwise Bitcoin is going to choke in unconfirmed transactions soon.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&timespan=all&scale=1&address=

Hello OP I would assume when you made this post a while ago that when you said to increase the block size limit you meant for the core development team to do a hard fork just like the proposal of the XT backers?

Fast forward to today and knowing what we know now, specifically with Ethereum's hard fork fiasco where the result was the original chain has become its own competitor, do still think the core developers should still hurry up and do the hard fork now?