Author: Dave Scotese 2015-09-18 17:10:08
Published on: 2015-09-18T17:10:08+00:00
During a discussion among core developers, the possibility of increasing block size limit through a hard fork was debated. Though there was no consensus on the exact numbers, some options thrown out were 2-4-8 and 17% per year, with a limit to smooth increase for X time before requiring a second hard fork if necessary. One possible metric for block size limit was suggested as BTCDaysDestroyed (BTCDD), which could be computed for all blocks less than or equal in size to the average size of the largest 200 blocks in the previous difficulty period. This would ensure that miners must have enough BTCDD per byte to exceed the limit. However, concerns were raised about the worst case propagation and validation time, and an alternative metric may need to be considered. There was also disagreement over the requirement for a second hard fork, as some felt it could be more dangerous than an exponential growth curve. Nevertheless, the discussions aimed to resolve the impasse on block size limit and reach a compromise by considering other metrics beyond block size.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T22:37:51.201192+00:00