@LaurentMT Also @gavinandresen referred to full scale network simulations spinning up; I’d like to know more.
@LaurentMT Propagation worries me most - I’d hope that IBLT lands before / in conjunction with larger blocks.
@JeromeLegoupil Gavin has done a good job addressing objections IMo. And there will always be reasons to maintain status quo.
@orweinberger @gavinandresen But I’d also like to not have to rehash this debate every time blocks get full…
@orweinberger @gavinandresen IMO any increase with full consensus is preferable to larger increase with lots of conflict.
@orweinberger The Core Devs aren’t the only ones with a stake or with a say in this game.
@jonmatonis @pierre_rochard I hope embedded mining socializes away the cost of mining so that we don’t need to worry about it.
@pierre_rochard The hard question is when do we worry about fee revenue vs miner subsidy.
@pierre_rochard It think it’s dangerous to try to categorize which usage is real / legitimate. I like @gavinandresen’s neutral approach.
7) When given the choice between doing /nothing/ and doing /something/ while hurtling toward a virtual brick wall, I choose the latter.
6) While it’s true that Bitcoin won’t break if we hit capacity and confirmations take days, this hobbles one of its greatest features.
5) Unhappy users leave in search of alternative services that can provide the high quality & reliability they demand.
4) At @Bronto we knew that delayed processing, even if only during short spiky periods of high usage, would make our users unhappy.
3) Industry best practice is to begin planning capacity increases as you approach 50% capacity; you never want to exceed 90% usage.
2) When it comes to capacity planning for a high growth system, you don’t take a “wait and see†approach. This leads to emergency changes.
1) For the past 8 years I worked as an engineer for @Bronto Software where we experienced ~50% YoY growth in data processing requirements.
