pull down to refresh
1031 sats \ 18 replies \ @SimpleStacker 5 Sep \ on: Nicolas Dorier (BTC Payserver): increasing OP_RETURN limit will help our users bitcoin
Having recently synced a fullnode from scratch, using old hardware, IBD took an entire month, whereas same hardware 3 years ago IBD took 3 days.
IMO, UTXO bloat is the main technical issue facing Bitcoin right now, so to the extent that larger OP_RETURN sizes will actually cause the shitcoiners to move their data there instead of in witness script, that seems like a positive development.
Right but in the thread don't they touch on the fact that not many are likely to move to OP_RETURN because it will still be cheaper to do it the other way.
reply
Not many will move from using inscriptions (Taproot input scripts) to OP_RETURN (an output type). But some that are storing arbitrary data that aren't inscriptions (JPEGs etc), but are using fake public keys creating unprovably-unspendable outputs that permanently bloat the UTXO set, will hopefully switch to OP_RETURN.
reply
reply
"witness data—which includes digital signatures—does not contribute to the long-term size of the UTXO set that nodes must store permanently."
this turned out to be false?
searchcrumb: "why does segregated witness have a witness discount?"
reply
I think it's more that the witness discount incentivized the creation of way more UTXOs, which weren't used for monetary transactions but instead used to store arbitrary data. So the bloat is the number of UTXOs that the witness discount incentivized
reply
iiuc you're saying is this:
utxo bloat is inevitable, since nothing forces people to spend their utxos, whether they are spendable or not.
the witness discount just redistributed the bloat to aegwit utxos.
I guess that's why I support bigger op returns. At least they can be pruned.
reply
Right, but the original intent of the witness discount was to incentivize utxo consolidation.
Before the discount, a tx with 1 input and 2 outputs was cheaper than a tx with 2 inputs and 1 output (because 2 inputs require 2 signatures). The discount was an attempt to equalize the costs and reduce utxo bloat.
It's wild to me that it had the complete opposite effect.
reply
i wonder if they were aware of the possibility that people would use the witness discount to store arbitrary data, or if they were caught by surprise
reply
I'd wager they were caught by surprise.
indeed
reply
Right, that's why I qualified my statement with "to the extent that"
I hope the spamming is just a fad and all the spammers lose all their money. No one needs jpegs on the blockchain and there are better technologies for that.
reply
IBD took an entire month, whereas same hardware 3 years ago IBD took 3 days. IMO, UTXO bloat is the main technical issue
If you do full IBD, UTXO size is not the main issue for you, you anyway fully process all the blocks after
assumevalid.reply
Hmm, I assumed my problem was that I couldn't hold the UTXO in memory and so it was constantly using my HD which is a lot slower. I don't know enough about the details to really know what else could be the problem.
reply
Depends on amount of RAM you have and other settings (like
dbcache, especially important during IBD).reply
reply
What settings do you have?
Also, @remindme in 1 week. The sync becomes significantly slower after about 60% due to inscription spam