iris

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-14 📝 Original message:There is a proposal that relates to this, see the flexcap proposal by Greg Maxwell & Mark Friedenbach, it was discussed on the list back in May: lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008017.html and lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008038.html Adam On 14 August 2015 at 15:48, Jakob Rönnbäck <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > 14 aug 2015 kl. 16:20 skrev Anthony Towns <aj at erisian.com.au>: > > On 14 August 2015 at 11:59, Jakob Rönnbäck > <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >> What if one were to adjust the difficulty (for individual blocks) >> depending on the relative size to the average block size of the previous >> difficulty period? (I apologize if i’m not using the correct terms, I’m not >> a real programmer, and I’ve only recently started to subscribe to the >> mailing list) > > > That would mean that as usage grew, blocksize could increase, but > confirmation times would also increase (though presumably less than > linearly). That seems like a loss? > > > Would that really be the case though? If it takes 5% to find a block, but it > contains 5% more transactions would that not mean it’s the same? That would > argue against the change if not for the fact that the blocks will be bigger > for the next difficulty period. > > If you also let the increase in confirmation time (due to miners finding > harder blocks rather than a reduction in hashpower) then get reflected back > as decreased difficulty, it'd probably be simpler to just dynamically adjust > the max blocksize wouldn't it? > > > I guess that could make the difficulty fluctuate a bit depending on the > amount of transactions and the fees being paid. Would it really matter in > the long run though? Since it’s the same amount of miners, doesn’t that just > mean it’s just the number that is lower, not the actual investment needed to > mine the blocks? Not sure if this would open up some forms of attacks on the > system for someone willing to lose money though… > > > Very good feedback though, thanks a lot :) > > /jakob > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
0