Why all blocksize propositions are round numbers ? - page 2.

DumbFruit

sr. member

Activity: 433

Merit: 267

Quote from: DannyHamilton on January 28, 2016, 09:39:02 AM

Quote from: DumbFruit on January 28, 2016, 08:46:49 AM

Quote from: Glucose on January 28, 2016, 08:39:39 AM

+ Several secessionists are high profile. They are not just a bunch of idiots trying to break bitcoin.

These are not mutually exclusive.

Those supporting Core are the secessionists, right?

Classic is the original protocol with all of the latest updates, and Core is the software that is trying to split off into their own fork of the blockchain by ignoring some valid blocks and rejecting recent updates.

I'm genuinely surprised that you support Bitcoin Classic, that should give anybody pause. I thought you were joking earlier. Why do you prefer a simple 2MB hardfork over the Segregated Witness softfork?

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3528

Merit: 4945

Quote from: DumbFruit on January 28, 2016, 08:46:49 AM

Quote from: Glucose on January 28, 2016, 08:39:39 AM

+ Several secessionists are high profile. They are not just a bunch of idiots trying to break bitcoin.

These are not mutually exclusive.

Those supporting Core are the secessionists, right?

Classic is the original protocol with all of the latest updates, and Core is the software that is trying to split off into their own fork of the blockchain by ignoring some valid blocks and rejecting recent updates.

DumbFruit

sr. member

Activity: 433

Merit: 267

Quote from: Glucose on January 28, 2016, 08:39:39 AM

+ Several secessionists are high profile. They are not just a bunch of idiots trying to break bitcoin.

These are not mutually exclusive.

Glucose

hero member

Activity: 861

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Erkallys on January 27, 2016, 01:56:29 PM

Please don't do this big mistake ! Bitcoin Core will increase the blocksize soon or later, so don't help the secessionists !

As I said, sooner would be better than later.

I trust Bitcoin Core developpers and I would really be happy if they do so. But they have to do it in time. Right now it seems critical and change has to come really fast.

+ Several secessionists are high profile. They are not just a bunch of idiots trying to break bitcoin.

shorena

copper member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1528

No I dont escrow anymore.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: DannyHamilton on January 27, 2016, 11:55:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm speculating here without real research, but it's likely because of computational efficiency. Things work best as powers of 2, e.g. 1,048,576 (1MB), 2,097,152 (2MB), etc.

No. The current block limit is not a power of 2:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/605c17844ea32b6d237db6d83871164dc7d59dab/src/consensus/consensus.h#L10

Code:

/** The maximum allowed size for a serialized block, in bytes (network rule) */
static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000;

Thanks for correcting me! I guess if I took even a few seconds to research I would have come across this Embarrassed

What you had in mind is 1MiB[1] not 1MB. Sadly its common to use 1MB for both, which means almost anyone is confused with what 1MB actually means (1million bytes or 1024² bytes)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte

BlockSense

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Yes in general round numbers are probably easier to work with when defining parameters

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3528

Merit: 4945

Quote from: Glucose on January 27, 2016, 01:16:30 PM

I'll for sure switch to bitcoin classic.

I already have.

Quote from: Erkallys on January 27, 2016, 01:56:29 PM

Please don't do this big mistake ! Bitcoin Core will increase the blocksize soon or later, so don't help the secessionists !

That's ok. If they increase it to 2 MB then Core and Classic will be compatible. Then I can just switch back to Core if I like.

Erkallys

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1004

Quote from: Glucose on January 27, 2016, 01:16:30 PM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on January 27, 2016, 11:55:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm speculating here without real research, but it's likely because of computational efficiency. Things work best as powers of 2, e.g. 1,048,576 (1MB), 2,097,152 (2MB), etc.

No. The current block limit is not a power of 2:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/605c17844ea32b6d237db6d83871164dc7d59dab/src/consensus/consensus.h#L10

Code:

/** The maximum allowed size for a serialized block, in bytes (network rule) */
static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000;

I guess there is no more choice. The Block size has to increase soon or later. And sooner will be better than later.

I can see how transactions are getting slower and slower. In a few weeks / months the fees are going to explode.

I'll for sure switch to bitcoin classic. 2 MB seems a good first step.

There's probably no reason for 2 MB instead of 1.5 or 5. It's just marketing. 8 MB was too much and noby liked the way the Bitcoin XT project as been presented.

Please don't do this big mistake ! Bitcoin Core will increase the blocksize soon or later, so don't help the secessionists !

Glucose

hero member

Activity: 861

Merit: 1001

Quote from: DannyHamilton on January 27, 2016, 11:55:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm speculating here without real research, but it's likely because of computational efficiency. Things work best as powers of 2, e.g. 1,048,576 (1MB), 2,097,152 (2MB), etc.

No. The current block limit is not a power of 2:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/605c17844ea32b6d237db6d83871164dc7d59dab/src/consensus/consensus.h#L10

Code:

/** The maximum allowed size for a serialized block, in bytes (network rule) */
static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000;

I guess there is no more choice. The Block size has to increase soon or later. And sooner will be better than later.

I can see how transactions are getting slower and slower. In a few weeks / months the fees are going to explode.

I'll for sure switch to bitcoin classic. 2 MB seems a good first step.

There's probably no reason for 2 MB instead of 1.5 or 5. It's just marketing. 8 MB was too much and noby liked the way the Bitcoin XT project as been presented.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3528

Merit: 4945

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm speculating here without real research, but it's likely because of computational efficiency. Things work best as powers of 2, e.g. 1,048,576 (1MB), 2,097,152 (2MB), etc.

No. The current block limit is not a power of 2:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/605c17844ea32b6d237db6d83871164dc7d59dab/src/consensus/consensus.h#L10

Code:

/** The maximum allowed size for a serialized block, in bytes (network rule) */
static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000;

Erkallys

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1004

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Erkallys on January 23, 2016, 03:58:53 PM

Actually the blocksize is 1 MB, and Bitcoin classic propose to increase it to 2 MB, Bitcoin XT to 8 MB. Why no one actually proposed 1,25 MB or 1,5 MB blocks ? Is it "allowed" by Bitcoin's code ? Is there any other reason that make that no proposition like this exist ? 1,25 MB or 1,5 blocks would be a softer transition than going directly to 2 MB.

I'm speculating here without real research, but it's likely because of computational efficiency. Things work best as powers of 2, e.g. 1,048,576 (1MB), 2,097,152 (2MB), etc.

This haven't been proposed yet, and I have to confess that it is a really clever idea ! It seems the most probable reason with the psycological effect proposed early.

Jet Cash

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 2472

https://JetCash.com

Why not pi. Then we can argue about the number of decimal places.

watashi-kokoto

sr. member

Activity: 689

Merit: 269

What about 1.337 MB?
Grin

Erkallys

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1004

Quote from: RocketSingh on January 23, 2016, 07:35:38 PM

Quote from: Erkallys on January 23, 2016, 03:58:53 PM

Actually the blocksize is 1 MB, and Bitcoin classic propose to increase it to 2 MB, Bitcoin XT to 8 MB. Why no one actually proposed 1,25 MB or 1,5 MB blocks ? Is it "allowed" by Bitcoin's code ? Is there any other reason that make that no proposition like this exist ? 1,25 MB or 1,5 blocks would be a softer transition than going directly to 2 MB.

To the best of my understanding, neither BIP 103 nor BIP 106 Proposal 2 will yield round number as block size max cap.

These are flexible blocksize propositions, they are specific cases. When it is a constant blocksize, it is round numbers.

RocketSingh

legendary

Activity: 1662

Merit: 1050

Quote from: Erkallys on January 23, 2016, 03:58:53 PM

Actually the blocksize is 1 MB, and Bitcoin classic propose to increase it to 2 MB, Bitcoin XT to 8 MB. Why no one actually proposed 1,25 MB or 1,5 MB blocks ? Is it "allowed" by Bitcoin's code ? Is there any other reason that make that no proposition like this exist ? 1,25 MB or 1,5 blocks would be a softer transition than going directly to 2 MB.

To the best of my understanding, neither BIP 103 nor BIP 106 Proposal 2 will yield round number as block size max cap.

Erkallys

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1004

Quote from: achow101 on January 23, 2016, 04:03:17 PM

I don't think there really is any reason for it. I think that it is just because people like round numbers, not decimals. Also, if the increase is really small, like only 0.25 Mb, then it really isn't worth going through the pain of hard forking for such a small increase.

So there's no real reason except marketing. Also, I don't think that they should do an hard fork, whichever number they choose.

Quote from: Peter Todd on January 23, 2016, 04:33:26 PM

Because they're not based on science.

How could they be based on science ? Please explain.

Peter Todd

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1164

Because they're not based on science.

guoyu78

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 541

it's the same if you count in byte ( you loss decimals Tongue

) but a change is hard to accept for both ways....

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

I don't think there really is any reason for it. I think that it is just because people like round numbers, not decimals. Also, if the increase is really small, like only 0.25 Mb, then it really isn't worth going through the pain of hard forking for such a small increase.

Erkallys

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1004

Actually the blocksize is 1 MB, and Bitcoin classic propose to increase it to 2 MB, Bitcoin XT to 8 MB. Why no one actually proposed 1,25 MB or 1,5 MB blocks ? Is it "allowed" by Bitcoin's code ? Is there any other reason that make that no proposition like this exist ? 1,25 MB or 1,5 blocks would be a softer transition than going directly to 2 MB.

Topic: Why all blocksize propositions are round numbers ? - page 2. (Read 3318 times)