Author: mm-studios 2022-10-19 22:53:54
Published on: 2022-10-19T22:53:54+00:00
The email thread discusses an idea to increase the throughput in the Bitcoin network by allowing miners to include transactions until a block is filled. This would create a structure called a "Brick," which is a block that doesn't meet the difficulty rule and is filled with transactions to its full capacity. Once a brick is fully filled, it is broadcasted, and nodes have it on a separate fork as usual. At this point, instead of discarding transactions, the miner starts working on a new brick, linked with the previous one. The accumulated PoW calculated using mathematics determines the validity of the full "brickchain" as a block. The email also mentions that reducing settlement speed is a desirable feature and it isn't something that needs fixing. The focus should be on layer 2 protocols that allow the ability to hold and transfer uncommitted transactions as pools and joins, so that layer 1's decentralization and incentives can remain undisturbed. The email references protocols such as mweb. The email acknowledges that while big-blockers proposed removing limits, it came with undesirable effects that were widely discussed and rejected. The email suggests that the proposed idea could completely flush mempools, keep transaction fees low, and increase throughput without increasing the block size that would raise concerns related to propagation. However, the email acknowledges that more work needs to be done to refine the idea and determine its feasibility. The email also references "bobtail" for a weak block proposal that produces a more consistent discovery time and "tailstorm" for a proposal that uses the content of those weak blocks as a commitment to what transactions miners are working on, but both proposals are unlikely to be put into bitcoin.
Updated on: 2023-06-16T02:15:27.939721+00:00