📅 Original date posted:2014-07-18
📝 Original message:On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Gavin Andresen
<gavinandresen at gmail.com> wrote:
> But if there was some agreed-upon canonical ordering, then it should
> theoretically be possible to take shortcuts in the "what order".
>
> You'd start with setof(transactions I think everybody knows about)
> Select some subset, based on miner's policy
> Sort that subset with the canonical ordering algorithm
> Very efficiently broadcast, taking all sorts of shortcuts assuming most of
> your peers already know the set you started with and expect the same
> canonical ordering (see gmaxwell's thoughts on block encoding).
Related implementation detail: Having pursued this train of thought,
I noted that you don't want to include too-young transactions that you
received in the past few seconds, because those are likely still
propagating around the network.
> Second half-baked thought:
> I wonder if broadcasting your transaction selection policy ("11KB of free
> transactions, sorted by priority, then 111K of fee-paying transactions,
> sorted by fee") might make it possible to save even more bandwidth by
> letting your peers create a very good approximation of your block with just
> that information....
Absolutely. One path I would like to see pursued is multiple
p2pool-esque chains. Each with their own policy, perhaps with their
own administrative team. ie. you could have a fully decentralized
p2pool-like chain, or multiple such chains, each with a stated
policy/reward pattern. Or, GHash/BTCGuild/Eligius could run a
semi-centrally managed chain ultimately guaranteed not only by
protocol but by administrators' digital signatures.
In each case, advertising technical attributes about your pool [chain]
policy would give nodes the better ability to predict what is in an
upcoming block.
And the flip side of that, such predictions are never perfect. Need
to make sure the fallback case, while undoubtedly more costly than the
Fast Path, is not overly painful.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
Jeff Garzik [ARCHIVE] /
npub1kf…f3f58
2023-06-07 15:24:07
in reply to nevent1q…xq48
Author Public Key
npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58Published at
2023-06-07 15:24:07Event JSON
{
"id": "a91ae384bc618d37594256a93f928136f5bbc2fdcf2a2c2ae4d5a7799cc0951e",
"pubkey": "b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11",
"created_at": 1686151447,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3507527acf6651445fc18e718512a320c7c5edde322b321b00914bf719d85722",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c15fb6d0e3b62aa4c340eadb14a172a9199e1cc33fbe6bde36f12a6b3485625b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-07-18\n📝 Original message:On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Gavin Andresen\n\u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e But if there was some agreed-upon canonical ordering, then it should\n\u003e theoretically be possible to take shortcuts in the \"what order\".\n\u003e\n\u003e You'd start with setof(transactions I think everybody knows about)\n\u003e Select some subset, based on miner's policy\n\u003e Sort that subset with the canonical ordering algorithm\n\u003e Very efficiently broadcast, taking all sorts of shortcuts assuming most of\n\u003e your peers already know the set you started with and expect the same\n\u003e canonical ordering (see gmaxwell's thoughts on block encoding).\n\nRelated implementation detail: Having pursued this train of thought,\nI noted that you don't want to include too-young transactions that you\nreceived in the past few seconds, because those are likely still\npropagating around the network.\n\n\u003e Second half-baked thought:\n\u003e I wonder if broadcasting your transaction selection policy (\"11KB of free\n\u003e transactions, sorted by priority, then 111K of fee-paying transactions,\n\u003e sorted by fee\") might make it possible to save even more bandwidth by\n\u003e letting your peers create a very good approximation of your block with just\n\u003e that information....\n\nAbsolutely. One path I would like to see pursued is multiple\np2pool-esque chains. Each with their own policy, perhaps with their\nown administrative team. ie. you could have a fully decentralized\np2pool-like chain, or multiple such chains, each with a stated\npolicy/reward pattern. Or, GHash/BTCGuild/Eligius could run a\nsemi-centrally managed chain ultimately guaranteed not only by\nprotocol but by administrators' digital signatures.\n\nIn each case, advertising technical attributes about your pool [chain]\npolicy would give nodes the better ability to predict what is in an\nupcoming block.\n\nAnd the flip side of that, such predictions are never perfect. Need\nto make sure the fallback case, while undoubtedly more costly than the\nFast Path, is not overly painful.\n\n\n-- \nJeff Garzik\nBitcoin core developer and open source evangelist\nBitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/",
"sig": "479ff667fb8ef05232a8b357050f961a4fa21a0fb31dabe83f72981785743439ab234185ca718b268222f49efb72e9b32753924b050ab81cb652ea26b68524c7"
}