📅 Original date posted:2023-02-01
🗒️ Summary of this message: A technical discussion on the efficiency of using OP_FALSE IF ... ENDIF versus OpPush <data> OpDrop for pushing large amounts of data into the Bitcoin blockchain.
📝 Original message:On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:07:16PM -0500, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
>
> On January 31, 2023 7:46:32 PM EST, Christopher Allen via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >All other things being equal, which is better if you need to place a
> >64-bytes into the Bitcoin blockchain? A traditional OP_RETURN or a spent
> >taproot transaction such as:
> >
> >OP_FALSE
> >OP_IF
> >OP_PUSH my64bytes
> >OP_ENDIF
>
> What's wrong with OpPush <data> OpDrop?
>
This is a technical nit, but the reason is that <data> is limited to 520
bytes (and I believe, 80 bytes by standardness in Taproot), so if you
are pushing a ton of data and need multiple pushes, it's more efficient
to use FALSE IF ... ENDIF since you avoid the repeated DROPs.
--
Andrew Poelstra
Director of Research, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
The sun is always shining in space
-Justin Lewis-Webster
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20230201/4ed63515/attachment.sig>;
Andrew Poelstra [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ae…z5t04
2023-06-07 23:18:55
in reply to nevent1q…zye3
Author Public Key
npub1ae27kq6z802dkqw4ey4dgdx493szm8dpmcm76d7vt0ma9gf6fj4svz5t04Published at
2023-06-07 23:18:55Event JSON
{
"id": "a75fc2545583dddab36da0258eac442c12bc6f8abf050a092d21ce802f88587c",
"pubkey": "ee55eb03423bd4db01d5c92ad434d52c602d9da1de37ed37cc5bf7d2a13a4cab",
"created_at": 1686179935,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"db7e30240de322a59459e6f6d735c7f019f73c8194514d70467812fbd7606451",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"dc0f9f7f1af5cb2463155755549517a0ac2e6ab22666f94821eb69d9b3fba99e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2023-02-01\n🗒️ Summary of this message: A technical discussion on the efficiency of using OP_FALSE IF ... ENDIF versus OpPush \u003cdata\u003e OpDrop for pushing large amounts of data into the Bitcoin blockchain.\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:07:16PM -0500, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e On January 31, 2023 7:46:32 PM EST, Christopher Allen via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003eAll other things being equal, which is better if you need to place a\n\u003e \u003e64-bytes into the Bitcoin blockchain? A traditional OP_RETURN or a spent\n\u003e \u003etaproot transaction such as:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003eOP_FALSE\n\u003e \u003eOP_IF\n\u003e \u003eOP_PUSH my64bytes\n\u003e \u003eOP_ENDIF\n\u003e \n\u003e What's wrong with OpPush \u003cdata\u003e OpDrop?\n\u003e\n\nThis is a technical nit, but the reason is that \u003cdata\u003e is limited to 520\nbytes (and I believe, 80 bytes by standardness in Taproot), so if you\nare pushing a ton of data and need multiple pushes, it's more efficient\nto use FALSE IF ... ENDIF since you avoid the repeated DROPs.\n\n-- \nAndrew Poelstra\nDirector of Research, Blockstream\nEmail: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net\nWeb: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew\n\nThe sun is always shining in space\n -Justin Lewis-Webster\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 488 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20230201/4ed63515/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "dcb4e3f1ef0d21b83e76e1e600cde96d719b5303544be37e12e9ebdc5a29885e30a29dd5c0f711ce469889fdb64a0177093ba098ee80613276d22c97260f830f"
}