AWARD-WINNING

CASINO CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE

CLUBHOUSE 1500+

GAMES 2 MIN

CASH-OUTS 24/7

SUPPORT 100s OF

FREE SPINS PLAY NOW Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertised sitesre not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum.They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.

AbsoluteZero



Offline



Activity: 66

Merit: 10







MemberActivity: 66Merit: 10 Re: Block Size soft-limit maxing out this AM 6/3/13 March 06, 2013, 06:03:21 AM

Last edit: March 06, 2013, 06:22:53 AM by AbsoluteZero #6 Quote from: Syke on March 06, 2013, 05:46:06 AM

It is very good. Now people will start including larger fees with their transactions.





Even with higher fees, if blocks are full then transactions will be left behind.





How does the 250 limit go away? I thought is up to each miner.



If a miner fills a block higher than 250Kb and less than 1Mg will it be rejected by the other miners?

EDIT - Ok just saw an 487Kb transaction



Even with higher fees, if blocks are full then transactions will be left behind.How does the 250 limit go away? I thought is up to each miner.If a miner fills a block higher than 250Kb and less than 1Mg will it be rejected by the other miners?

jgarzik





Offline



Activity: 1596

Merit: 1008







LegendaryActivity: 1596Merit: 1008 Re: Block Size soft-limit maxing out this AM 6/3/13 March 06, 2013, 06:32:42 AM #7 The "soft" limit is set by each miner.



When I mined using vanilla, unmodified bitcoind + p2pool, it was a simple configuration setting to change the limit to 900k.



My first block was over 400k.



Soft limit "maxing out" is a non-event.



Jeff Garzik, Bloq CEO, former bitcoin core dev team; opinions are my own.

Visit bloq.com / metronome.io

Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj

fergalish



Offline



Activity: 440

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 440Merit: 250 Re: Block Size soft-limit maxing out this AM 6/3/13 March 06, 2013, 09:39:01 PM #17



Quick estimate: 4xGPU = $1000, lifetime 12 months, equals a cost of roughly $0.02 per block.



Current difficulty, roughly 4 million, meaning you need to perform 17x10^15 = 17 PetaHashes PH to solve a block. The card will perform 1.5MH/J, meaning you need about 10GJ of energy to perform all those 17 PH. 10 GJ of energy is equal to about 2700 kWh which, at $0.20 each, will cost maybe $550. The 25BTC reward from the block, right now, gets you over $1000. Leaving a profit of $1000 - $550 - $0.02 = $449.98 per block solved, which you can expect roughly every 150 days (17 PH per block divided by 1.3 GH/sec for the 4 GPUs). Data from



Naturally a clever miner will have 40 GPUs instead of 4, and earn those $449.98 every 15 days instead. Or maybe 400 GPUs.



Of course, a clever *and* lucky miner, will be running an ASIC, say, a BFL minirig, churning out 1.5TH/s (no consumer versions online yet, supposedly), solving perhaps 7 blocks per day but requiring only 17 MJ per block solved, roughly 5 kWh or $1.00. Depreciation of the minirig ($35000) over, say, 36 months will cost $0.22 per block. So the BFL minirig miner would profit by $1000 - $1.00 - $0.22 = $998.78 per block solved, or roughly $7,000 per day. How bad!



I did ignore the fact that the difficulty will increase in these estimates. If I made any other glaring mistakes, please point them out.



Typical Tx fees per block are now maybe 0.3BTC. So even if that were to go up by a factor of 10, it would still be far less significant than the block reward.



Bearing in mind that the purpose of the transaction fee is to attract miners and secure the network, it should be clear that increasing fees at this time is not going to achieve its designated purpose. The block reward is already much more than sufficient for that. And it certainly won't create more block space. What it *will* do, however, is alienate users.



Insisting on higher fees because miners have a monopoly on a commodity (block space) with an artificially imposed scarcity... well, really just sounds like the big boys club all over again, doesn't it? Higher fees is not the solution to this. At present the miners are already massively profiting; their electricity costs are far below the income from solving a block, even for GPU miners, and even if you include depreciation of equipment.Quick estimate: 4xGPU = $1000, lifetime 12 months, equals a cost of roughly $0.02 per block.Current difficulty, roughly 4 million, meaning you need to perform 17x10^15 = 17 PetaHashes PH to solve a block. The card will perform 1.5MH/J, meaning you need about 10GJ of energy to perform all those 17 PH. 10 GJ of energy is equal to about 2700 kWh which, at $0.20 each, will cost maybe $550. The 25BTC reward from the block, right now, gets you over $1000. Leaving a profit of $1000 - $550 - $0.02 = $449.98 per block solved, which you can expect roughly every 150 days (17 PH per block divided by 1.3 GH/sec for the 4 GPUs). Data from https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison Naturally a clever miner will have 40 GPUs instead of 4, and earn those $449.98 every 15 days instead. Or maybe 400 GPUs.Of course, a clever *and* lucky miner, will be running an ASIC, say, a BFL minirig, churning out 1.5TH/s (no consumer versions online yet, supposedly), solving perhaps 7 blocks per day but requiring only 17 MJ per block solved, roughly 5 kWh or $1.00. Depreciation of the minirig ($35000) over, say, 36 months will cost $0.22 per block. So the BFL minirig miner would profit by $1000 - $1.00 - $0.22 = $998.78 per block solved, or roughly $7,000 per day. How bad!I did ignore the fact that the difficulty will increase in these estimates. If I made any other glaring mistakes, please point them out.Typical Tx fees per block are now maybe 0.3BTC. So even if that were to go up by a factor of 10, it would still be far less significant than the block reward.Bearing in mind that the purpose of the transaction fee is to attract miners and secure the network, it should be clear that increasing fees at this time is not going to achieve its designated purpose. The block reward is already much more than sufficient for that. And it certainly won't create more block space. What it *will* do, however, is alienate users.Insisting on higher fees because miners have a monopoly on a commodity (block space) with an artificially imposed scarcity... well, really just sounds like the big boys club all over again, doesn't it?