Author: Jorge Timón 2015-11-14 13:48:04
Published on: 2015-11-14T13:48:04+00:00
The author agrees with the idea of defining a formal set of criteria. Proposals that schedule future increases to the blocksize consensus maximum, or leave it for miners to decide, can't be evaluated without making assumptions about the future. To address this, the author suggests having simulation and benchmarking software that can analyze proposals, give resource consumption benchmark data about average and worst cases, and also give some kind of metric from "mining centralization dynamics simulations." The author believes it would be ideal to have a metric for concrete block sizes, unrelated to the deployment mechanism, proposed activation date, and other details. In response to a suggestion that no user on the network should wait more than an hour to get three confirmations on the blockchain, the author explains that this depends on block space demand, the fee paid by the user, local relay and mining policies in the network, the form of the transaction, and even the network topology. There's no consensus rule that can guarantee that all transaction from all users will be included at most three blocks after they are relayed. However, there is a fee estimator that observes the chain and can estimate the market situation to tell you the average number of blocks for a given transaction with a given feerate.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T01:14:13.801298+00:00