Quote from: PatMan on May 05, 2013, 10:45:39 AM

Quote from: zvs on May 05, 2013, 10:42:40 AM

Quote from: PatMan on May 05, 2013, 10:39:43 AM

Quote from: mdude77 on May 05, 2013, 10:16:34 AM

Quote from: Subo1977 on May 05, 2013, 09:59:59 AM

Quote from: kano on May 05, 2013, 09:30:59 AM

Quote from: Subo1977 on May 05, 2013, 08:31:24 AM

Quote from: rav3n_pl on May 05, 2013, 08:21:12 AM

WOW! How?

1) actual bitcoin from git ( moves variables ...Fees.. from main.h to main.cpp)
2) set in src/main.cpp the parameters to
int64 CTransaction::nMinTxFee = 1000000000; # Override with -mintxfee
int64 CTransaction::nMinRelayTxFee = 1000000000;

3) compile bitcoin

EDIT:
Or.. not tested: set -mintxfee -minrelaytxfee to 1000000000 without editing main.cpp

4) in bitcoin.conf:
blockmaxsize=5000
blockprioritysize=0
blockminsize=0

Greets

Basically your saying that pool mining is 100 times better for bitcoin than your p2pool settings coz some pools can commit up to 100x the transactions that you do.
Transactions are the other part of what is necessary to keep bitcoin alive.
No transactions means no bitcoin.

I wouldn start a discussion over the pro and cons of TX handling with P2pool.

i would only show the impact of TX integration on the Performance in an actual setup.

No transactions == bad idea. No discussion needed.

M

+1

I mean, you can all pat yourselves on the back and give the +1's and the high fives for Bitcoin The Way It's Meant To Be Run and glory be to Shitloads of Transactions....

But why not fix p2pool, instead?

I've been asking that to be done for months now.......as you know.

good discussion,
I say'd there must be at problem but
Everybody say'd theres no problem with p2pool...

Fix the Problem....