Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Bitcoin XT - Officially #REKT (also goes for BIP101 fraud)
by
brg444
on 31/12/2015, 19:07:24 UTC
Quote from: rusty
This problem is far worse if blocks were 8MB: an 8MB transaction with 22,500 inputs and 3.95MB of outputs takes over 11 minutes to hash. If you can mine one of those, you can keep competitors off your heels forever, and own the bitcoin network… Well, probably not.  But there’d be a lot of emergency patching, forking and screaming…
And this is with the initial optimizations completed to speed up Verification.
This means that If we hardforked a 2MB MaxBlockSize increase on the main tree and we softforked/hardforked in SepSig, we would essentially have up to a 8MB limit (3.5MB to 8MB) in which an attack vector could be opened up with heavy output and multisig tx which would crash nodes.
What you are saying here is completely factually inaccurate, the number of transactions does not increase hashing time.

BitUsher may have confused things up with the term "hash" but what he says is factually correct.

Quote
Even a single-line change such as increasing the maximum block size has effects on other parts of the code, some of which are undesirable. For example, right now it’s possible to construct a transaction that takes up almost 1MB of space and which takes 30 seconds or more to validate on a modern computer (blocks containing such transactions have been mined). In 2MB blocks, a 2MB transaction can be constructed that may take over 10 minutes to validate which opens up dangerous denial-of-service attack vectors. Other lines of code would need to be changed to prevent these problems.
.

https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases-faq