📅 Original date posted:2019-04-07
📝 Original message:On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 17:45, simondev1 via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> ==Implementation==
> Sort transactions by FeeInSatoshiPerByte (lowest first)
> For each transaction starting from lowest FeeInSatoshiPerByte: Sum up the bytes of space used so far. Check if summed up bytes of space used so far is smaller or equal than the formula result.
> If this is valid for each transaction then the blocksize is valid.
Doesn't this break CPFP? I think to avoid that you'll need to rework
your proposed algorithm to treat chains of transactions as a group.
(And note that you could have multiple transactions in one block that
depend on the same "parent" transaction, also in the same block.)
Bernd Jendrissek [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nv…fc33f
2023-06-07 18:17:37
in reply to nevent1q…cvv9
Author Public Key
npub1nvq5fvffrnm296rpdlknzcs00mnaedm4wp23pz3cc3vpfjh7s9xqnfc33fPublished at
2023-06-07 18:17:37Event JSON
{
"id": "cc4d1400eeeaa9f8f1f441524aef5c8e087bd6a24646c988cdd609d965ec7259",
"pubkey": "9b0144b1291cf6a2e8616fed31620f7ee7dcb7757055108a38c45814cafe814c",
"created_at": 1686161857,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"722e1de047fd5a9c7312a5a0d56a4911c0ecb42ffc880d286aa7bdcc39193466",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"36b6370d04309557b949d0cffac0670766bb1a04cab0ae3ea0a0b9c2247f3048",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f14f3c71a4e63a12c842e4a50471263ada4b6cfde093fcb6588693a726b9b018"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2019-04-07\n📝 Original message:On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 17:45, simondev1 via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e ==Implementation==\n\u003e Sort transactions by FeeInSatoshiPerByte (lowest first)\n\u003e For each transaction starting from lowest FeeInSatoshiPerByte: Sum up the bytes of space used so far. Check if summed up bytes of space used so far is smaller or equal than the formula result.\n\u003e If this is valid for each transaction then the blocksize is valid.\n\nDoesn't this break CPFP? I think to avoid that you'll need to rework\nyour proposed algorithm to treat chains of transactions as a group.\n(And note that you could have multiple transactions in one block that\ndepend on the same \"parent\" transaction, also in the same block.)",
"sig": "a9530c8b532697899db652a99d237dcb4f65dd9fb410324c2f9db3e011dfbf37d6bbeb4143535a8a91db907afba8fd6b54895b6e9a12c8c4b8d55bd0324d9c78"
}