pull down to refresh
125 sats \ 5 replies \ @nerd2ninja 10h \ parent \ on: the more mempools differ, the slower compact blocks transfer bitcoin
So large mining operations can have high data bandwidth connections to each other, thereby having more time to work on a block than a smaller miner that may be part of a smaller pool say running off a gas generator in South Africa or helping sustain the energy demands vs energy supply inefficiencies of some power grid somewhere remote with much slower internet connectivity.
That direct connection vs node to node gossip to eventually some small miner can mean whole minutes of time that the bigger data center style miners have working on a block that those smaller miners are still hashing on the old block.
BUT when the trade off is preventing sovereign node runners from setting their own mempool policy, it doesn't seem like individuals are going to like that regardless of the downstream effects
reply
reply
reply
Sure it can, and giving small miners the knowledge that they should add major miners as direct peers helps. We also have by default 8 two way peers and 2 one way peers. Those 2 one way peers are meant to be the high data transfer peers to help blocks get through the network faster.
However, if you're one of those smaller miners, those 2 one way peers don't exactly help the block that you found get to those bigger miners faster which again puts the smaller miners blocks at higher risk of getting orphaned.
reply