@BldSwtTrs here is a summary of my understanding
This limit is the technical bound transaction limit, whenever miners approach this limit they will begin to experiences a negative return on energy input and draw back or sacrifice profit and let those who respect the limit prosper at their expense, the result is not centralization or infinite block size.
The inherent market mechanisms that limit growth to the technical limits of the network, before nodes drop as described below. BU allows the network to come to terms and understand them in time.
1. Compact blocks and Xthin blocks need to relay increasing missing transactions with growth - the closer the block size gets to network capacity the greater the number of transactions that will have not fully propagated the network at the time a block in mined. Missing transactions need to propagate before they can be validated in a block. When transactions are missing orphan risk increases as competition mounts for new blocks. The number of missing transactions increases the validation time and correlated so does orphan risk. - there is a very real cost that deters including more transactions than the network can handle.
Point 6 being the BU proposal, the other 5 being inherent to bitcoin, why no one discusses this info is beyond me. All these ideas have been hashed out and refined in this thread. I've just summarized them as best I can.
The actual transaction limit is not within anyone's control, the actual limit is a technical limit it is governed by the networks capacity. The actual technical limit you can imagine sits on a bell curve with very slow CPU's and internet connections on the left and very fast CPUs and internet connections on the right, and the vast majority somewhere in the middle.
This limit is the technical bound transaction limit, whenever miners approach this limit they will begin to experiences a negative return on energy input and draw back or sacrifice profit and let those who respect the limit prosper at their expense, the result is not centralization or infinite block size.
The inherent market mechanisms that limit growth to the technical limits of the network, before nodes drop as described below. BU allows the network to come to terms and understand them in time.
1. Compact blocks and Xthin blocks need to relay increasing missing transactions with growth - the closer the block size gets to network capacity the greater the number of transactions that will have not fully propagated the network at the time a block in mined. Missing transactions need to propagate before they can be validated in a block. When transactions are missing orphan risk increases as competition mounts for new blocks. The number of missing transactions increases the validation time and correlated so does orphan risk. - there is a very real cost that deters including more transactions than the network can handle.
2. Another optimization is parallel validation, here too smaller blocks are advantaged by propagating early increasing the risk of orphaning larger blocks when two block are found at a similar time, the smaller one is validated propagated and built on. - there is a very real cost that deters including more transactions than the network can handle.
3. There is an inherent mechanism to processing very large blocks that may take over 30 seconds (or even 10 minus) to validate. Firstly they can be orphaned by any mentioned method, or can be built on and secured by mining empty blocks. In the later case fewer transactions are processed creating a transaction backlog and a technical limit and a increasing demand for block space. There is a very real demand for block space that builds to encourage miners to include priority transactions, and an incentive to cost optimize available network capacity.
4. Compact blocks and Xthin have to communicate information in the bloom filter that increases with the quantity of transactions in the block - I understand bloom filters describing more transaction are larger, and larger amounts of information the longer it takes to propagate and validate. Larger blocks increase orphan risk. - there is a very real cost that deters including more transactions than the network can handle.
3. There is an inherent mechanism to processing very large blocks that may take over 30 seconds (or even 10 minus) to validate. Firstly they can be orphaned by any mentioned method, or can be built on and secured by mining empty blocks. In the later case fewer transactions are processed creating a transaction backlog and a technical limit and a increasing demand for block space. There is a very real demand for block space that builds to encourage miners to include priority transactions, and an incentive to cost optimize available network capacity.
4. Compact blocks and Xthin have to communicate information in the bloom filter that increases with the quantity of transactions in the block - I understand bloom filters describing more transaction are larger, and larger amounts of information the longer it takes to propagate and validate. Larger blocks increase orphan risk. - there is a very real cost that deters including more transactions than the network can handle.
5. There is headers first mining where blocks are not validated and it can be abused to mine higher capacity than the network can handle. It comes with significantly orphan risk as stated above. The optimization here being all headers are the same size, in this case validation times increase orphan risk making this practice is very risky, - there is a very real cost that deters this practice in time miners become less profitable.
6. Like the majority network today miners will not deviate from the 1MB as the majority of users would reject that block, this is enforced through a Nash equilibrium, the same is true of use adjustable limits, BS/Core and BU depend on relay nodes to enforce a network limit. Although with a user set limit when transaction volume increases above capacity miners can be fooled with a sybil attack into making bigger block. Miners have an economic intensive to avoid orphan blocks, however if the network can handle the capacity the network will grow if not it will reject those blocks.
Point 6 being the BU proposal, the other 5 being inherent to bitcoin, why no one discusses this info is beyond me. All these ideas have been hashed out and refined in this thread. I've just summarized them as best I can.
Last edited:
