Quote from: franky1 on March 08, 2016, 09:09:07 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 08, 2016, 08:56:39 PM

Quote from: David Rabahy on March 08, 2016, 08:07:05 PM

So, one very large transaction with numerous sigops leads to the quadratic growth. Hmm, so blindly increasing the block size is asking for trouble. How many of these troublesome transactions are launched against us recently? Or is it an unexploited vulnerability?
Perhaps we could increase the block size *and* constrain sigops/transaction until we get SegWit out the door?

Well the problem is only minor at a 1 MB block size limit. Segwit should scale it down and make it linear. It should be released in April (from the initial estimates), so I don't see how you plan to deploy the block size limit and a sigops limitation in <2 months.

and now you see why a 2mb+segwit released in april with 6month grace is not a problem

i love it when lauda debunks his own doomsday scenario

having the 2mb block limit included in aprils release is easy. plus it incentivises more people to download the april version ensuring a real chance of no contention, instead of having upgrades every couple months EG march april july. which just mess with the community too much

Well, franky1, that's really interesting (although it could have been said just as well without the provocative words); 2MB + SegWit. We do want to be careful -- releasing multiple things at the same time can lead to confusion if things don't go perfectly well. I'd hate to see something going wrong and each side blaming the other. Also, if there would be a need to retract a feature/function then that would likely cause a media stir; something Bitcoin doesn't need anymore of at this time.