Topic: Why did miners waste much block space when there is need (Read 270 times)

I initially had the same thoughts,  but turned out i was wrong, the  <200ms average isn't a random figure i invented it was reported by Kano from his own pool logs, his pool is one of the oldest pools and the data he reports is probably the most accurate you can find on the internet.

By the way, the figure includes EVERYTHING from knowing about the block to the moment the pool generates work for its miners, ya some will take over 200ms, some less, but the average is around that.


Now if you think <200ms isn't worth it to mine empty blocks, you can read my post in the same topic explaining how it IS worth it for mining pools to invest those 200ms

In a perfect scenario, maybe, but the network is not perfect. The mining pool also has to build a candidate block, calculate the Merkle root, and then update all its miners with the new candidate block hash. If the whole process genuinely took only 200ms, then we wouldn't see empty blocks at all. But it simply is not that quick. It takes a few seconds in the real world, and so we still occasionally see empty blocks being mined.

Downloading, verifying transactions, and adjusting the node's mempool to purge the already confirmed transactions takes no more than 200ms, a mining pool would waste on average 14400ms a day if they refrain from mining empty blocks, depending on the size of their hashrate it could be anywhere between a few thousands to a few million dollars a year, of course, this comes at an expense which is increased probability of orphan race.

Taking it a bit past what was said above.
IF they are doing it properly and that is a big IF a large pool is running several nodes all over the world, when a block comes in they all should start validating it. Once a certain percentage of them agree then and only then do they start building the new block for the pool.

Loosing the fees even now is better then building a invalid block that gets rejected.
AND not broadcasting an empty block as soon as possible risks loosing it too.

It just comes down to routing. It takes about 1/2 a second to send 1 packet of data around the world without doing any kind of firewall / security inspection in an ideal setting.
Allowing for the nodes to verify what is in the block, and sending it back out is another couple of seconds and then start building a new block. If all is ideal you should have a new block ready to go in 10 seconds or so.

BUT, if you are waiting for minimum of 3 of 5 to do their thing you might add a few seconds on top of that.

Add in a bloated memory pool and some DPI From firewalls and you add a few seconds again.

All of a sudden you are looking at more time to build a block.

Even now there are 2 schools of thought with what happened with what happened with foundry the other day.
Some people including Kano are saying that they tried to orphan a couple of blocks.
Others are saying that they saw foundrys blocks 1st.

It has always been the way it works.

And part of the problem is that even if you understand BTC perfectly, unless you understand the true issues of internet routing and the true delays that proper DPI can put into network performance then it's never going to seem logical as to what happened.

Dave's pool can put it's nodes out there in public.
A corporation with all kinds of security requirements probably has 3 layers of security devices looking at all data coming in before it even hits the node to be processed. Dave's node has seen, and processed the block before it has even gotten through the security devices of some places. On the flip side, it's a lot harder to take out big corps node(s) by flooding them with bad data since it never even makes it into the network.


-Dave

* DPI = deep packet inspection. https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/dpi-deep-packet-inspection

I deliberately didn't even mention this because the effect is negligible.

In the last 20,000 blocks, I count 44 empty blocks, for an average of 1 every 454.5 blocks, or 4.435 per difficulty epoch.
Removing those 4.435 blocks per epoch would result in an epoch taking 44.35 minutes longer (on average).
Diving two weeks plus 44.35 minutes by 2016 results in an average block time of 10 minutes and 1.3 seconds.

That's not entirely correct: if miners would skip the few seconds between full blocks, the difficulty would be a bit lower (after 2 weeks). On average, the same amount of blocks would contain more transactions. There's just no reason for individual miners to do this.

To expand on the above answers:

When a node receives a block from somewhere else, it has to spend a little bit of time verifying that block, checking every transaction in the block is correct and accurate, and then updating its set of unconfirmed outputs to remove all the outputs which have just been spent and add all the new outputs which have just been created. This doesn't take long - usually in the order of a few seconds depending on your hardware - but it isn't instant.

While this is happening, a miner cannot create a new block filled with transactions to work on, because it doesn't know which transactions it can and cannot include until it verifies which transactions have just been mined in the block it just received. So for these few seconds, the miner's options are either to have their mining equipment sit idle and do nothing, or attempt to mine an empty block until they have fully verified the last block. Since having their equipment sit idle would be a waste of money, most miners attempt to mine an empty block for a few seconds until they create a normal block filled with transactions and then switched to trying to mine that instead. Very occasionally a miner will be successful in these few seconds and will mine an empty block.

I don't see how it is harmful at all. Even empty blocks add to the security of the network, and literally nothing is lost by an empty block being found - it does not make the next block any harder to find.

Yes, some pools even accept to mine totally empty blocks.
The biggest pools all do this : Binance Pool, Foundry, Antpool etc...

You can search on the forum, kano has explained many times why this is harmful for the BTC blockchain and why it is stupid to accept to validate empty blocks.

Some pools refuse to do this, including kano's pool. Unfortunately, profits before the interest of the blockchain itself takes precedence for the biggest pools.

This can also be an indication of a "Covert ASICBoost" since not including transactions is the only viable option to do it.

However, your example is definitely mined less than a minute after the pervious block
so the miner just got lucky and didn't had time to included transactions in it.

This usually happens when a block is found shortly after the previous block. Miners don't waste a block when they find one, even if they didn't have time to build the transactions yet.

I noticed a block confirmed less than an hour ago, but I also noticed that it contains only a single transaction, I was wondering why would they confirmed just a single transaction in a block amidst this period of large pending transactions.
This is the block that was found with a single transaction:
https://mempool.space/block/000000000000000000042e59020bb65cd4221498a9cb6fc81bb43a35bdf9d8b6

I was confused why will they mine a single transaction when everyone is looking for a way to move their bitcoin from one place to another, this doesn't make sense when they can allow others to include their transactions with the fees all together.