rich1.0npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-06-22 📝 Original message:On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 02:18:19PM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote: > I promised to write a BIP after I'd implemented > increase-the-maximum-block-size code, so here it is. It also lives at: > https://github.com/gavinandresen/bips/blob/blocksize/bip-8MB.mediawiki It's important that we see a wide range of realistic testing of what an 8MB limit could look in the near future. An important part of that testing is load testing. As of writing the BIP above has no mention of what switchover rules will be used for testnet; code floating around has August 1st 2015 as that date. I propose we use August 1st 2013. This switch over date should be set in the _past_ to allow for the creation (via reorg) of a realistic full-load blockchain on testnet to fully test the real-world behavior of the entire infrastructure ecosystem, including questions like the scalability of block explorers, SPV wallets, feasibility of initial syncronization, scalability of the UTXO set, etc. While this is of course inconvenient - 2 years of 8MB blocks is 840GB worth of data - the Bitcoin ecosystem can-not afford to make a change like this blindly. I'm sure with a $3.5 billion market cap at stake we can scrape together the resources to voluntarily run a few hundred full-load full-nodes for testing a change with the potential to destroy that market cap. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000000b953816d4c31e79b04d5b075bcacb8cf20e54ee3b61c316 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 650 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150622/4f20e897/attachment.sig>