Bitcoin Forum
November 13, 2024, 06:25:56 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: It's that time again - please ask your pool operator about their block policies  (Read 1530 times)
Mike Hearn (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1134


View Profile
June 28, 2013, 09:48:10 AM
 #1

Some months ago we made the collective decision to expire 0.7.x era Bitcoin nodes after around mid May, because they weren't reliably able to handle complex blocks. This date has come and gone, but there are still mining pools that are generating 250kb blocks, i.e. they have not modified the default Bitcoin settings.

This means that if there's a long gap between finding blocks, many transactions that could confirm don't because the block is full. It makes Bitcoin slower and more annoying to use. It's time to try again.

Pool ops - please advertise your block size policy widely and consider if the 250kb soft limit is appropriate.

Miners - please ask your pool ops to document their size policies and think about which ones you prefer.

I would recommend that the soft limit be removed (set to 1mb, same as the hard limit) to ensure that even when there are 40-60 minute gaps between blocks most transactions will confirm when one is found.

The last time we decided to do this, it caused problems because not all nodes had upgraded to the more reliable LevelDB version and the old code turned out to contain unexpected bugs that led to a sudden hard fork. However since then nearly all nodes are upgraded to the latest code, and some pools have been creating larger blocks for some time already (check blockchain.info). There have been no repeats of any issues.
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3586
Merit: 1098


Think for yourself


View Profile
June 28, 2013, 02:06:28 PM
 #2

and some pools have been creating larger blocks for some time already (check blockchain.info). There have been no repeats of any issues.

And what are the size of blocks that "some pools" are creating now for some time?

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Mike Hearn (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1134


View Profile
June 29, 2013, 12:49:42 PM
 #3

Larger than 243kb (which is the default if you don't change the settings). If you flip through the blocks you can find ones that are larger. Fortunately we're not under too much traffic pressure at the moment, things slackened off a bit since March/April, so the only time blocks need to be larger than the soft limit is when one wasn't found for a while. But it sucks to wait, doesn't it?
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3586
Merit: 1098


Think for yourself


View Profile
June 29, 2013, 02:12:51 PM
 #4

But it sucks to wait, doesn't it?

It's not a big deal for me at this time.  But at some point it will be.

I still have not seen an explanation why an artificial soft limit was established in the first place.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Mike Hearn (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1134


View Profile
June 29, 2013, 03:45:53 PM
 #5

Probably nobody knows any explanation. A lot of things in Bitcoin are still holdovers from when Satoshi wrote things just by himself, and he often failed to explain the reasons behind what he did. Probably it was yet another anti-spam system. In theory if we set the soft limit to 1mb and then all the space got filled up with useless spammy transactions it could be easily lowered again, but trying to find the balance between "good" and "bad" transactions is difficult. Especially because when we don't find a block for a while the good transactions pile up.

At the moment we don't seem to have much of a spam problem, so it makes sense to open up the throttle. Potentially, a soft limit phrased in terms of transactions per minute would make more sense than one based on a fixed block size.
Quantus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 883
Merit: 1005



View Profile
July 03, 2013, 11:28:01 PM
Last edit: July 03, 2013, 11:38:40 PM by Quantus
 #6

Probably nobody knows any explanation. A lot of things in Bitcoin are still holdovers from when Satoshi wrote things just by himself, and he often failed to explain the reasons behind what he did. Probably it was yet another anti-spam system. In theory if we set the soft limit to 1mb and then all the space got filled up with useless spammy transactions it could be easily lowered again, but trying to find the balance between "good" and "bad" transactions is difficult. Especially because when we don't find a block for a while the good transactions pile up.

At the moment we don't seem to have much of a spam problem, so it makes sense to open up the throttle. Potentially, a soft limit phrased in terms of transactions per minute would make more sense than one based on a fixed block size.

That's like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because your not getting wet.  


The day will come when the block chain is so large and its acceptance so wide spread that just maintaining a full copy of it will max out all consumer level internet connections. 
Postponing that day for as long as possible is the single most important Bitcoin related issue. 

(I am a 1MB block supporter who thinks all users should be using Full-Node clients)
Avoid the XT shills, they only want to destroy bitcoin, their hubris and greed will destroy us.
Know your adversary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
Mike Hearn (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1134


View Profile
July 04, 2013, 12:05:45 PM
 #7

That day will obviously never come if nobody can confirm their transactions in a reasonable amount of time.
Trongersoll
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 501



View Profile
July 04, 2013, 06:24:23 PM
 #8

That day will obviously never come if nobody can confirm their transactions in a reasonable amount of time.

sounds like the perfect solution Shocked
John (John K.)
Global Troll-buster and
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1227


Away on an extended break


View Profile
July 05, 2013, 05:14:58 PM
 #9

Moved here and stickied this to help it along. Wink
STT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4088
Merit: 1452



View Profile WWW
July 05, 2013, 07:31:33 PM
 #10

Quote
The day will come when the block chain is so large and its acceptance so wide spread that just maintaining a full copy of it will max out all consumer level internet connections.  
Postponing that day for as long as possible is the single most important Bitcoin related issue.  


If we ignore moores law then we can presume failure is inevitable for multiple reasons, why even bother.  I'd rather assume I'll have pure fibre plugged into my mobo at some point

▄▄███████████████████▄▄
▄███████████████████████▄
████████▀░░░░░░░▀████████
███████░░░░░░░░░░░███████
███████░░░░░░░░░░░███████
██████▀░░░░░░░░░░░▀██████
██████▄░░░░░▄███▄░▄██████
██████████▀▀█████████████
████▀▄██▀░░░░▀▀▀░▀██▄▀███
███░░▀░░░░░░░░░░░░░▀░░███
████▄▄░░░░▄███▄░░░░▄▄████
▀███████████████████████▀
▀▀███████████████████▀▀
 
 CHIPS.GG 
▄▄███████▄▄
▄████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████▄
███▀░▄░▀▀▀▀▀░▄░▀███
▄███
░▄▀░░░░░░░░░▀▄░███▄
▄███░▄░░░▄█████▄░░░▄░███▄
███░▄▀░░░███████░░░▀▄░███
███░█░░░▀▀▀▀▀░░░▀░░░█░███
███░▀▄░▄▀░▄██▄▄░▀▄░▄▀░██
▀███
░▀░▀▄██▀░▀██▄▀░▀░██▀
▀███
░▀▄░░░░░░░░░▄▀░██▀
▀███▄
░▀░▄▄▄▄▄░▀░▄███▀
▀█
███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀
█████████████████████████
▄▄███████▄▄
███
████████████▄
▄█▀▀▀▄
█████████▄▀▀▀█▄
▄██████▀▄▄▄▄▄▀██████▄
▄█████████████▄████████▄
████████▄███████▄████████
█████▄█████████▄██████
██▄▄▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀▄▄██
▀█████████▀▀███████████▀
▀███████████████████▀
██████████████████
▀████▄███▄▄
████▀
████████████████████████
3000+
UNIQUE
GAMES
|
12+
CURRENCIES
ACCEPTED
|
VIP
REWARD
PROGRAM
 
 
  Play Now  
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!