Martin Lie [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: š Original date posted:2015-06-11 š Original message:Peter Todd wrote: > Re: ...
š
Original date posted:2015-06-11
š Original message:Peter Todd wrote:
> Re: "dropped in an unpredictable way" - transactions would be dropped
> lowest fee/KB first, a completely predictable way.
It would be 'completely predictable' for whoever knew the state and
policies of a miner's mempool, but from an end user's perspective that
wouldn't matter much: The end users wouldn't know if their
transaction(s) would make the cut or not, somewhere in the network, and
by what time. They (obviously) won't know what miners will find the next
block(s), they won't know the miners' mempool sizes, potential custom
eviction policies, etc.
I agree that this can be somewhat remedied by FSSRBF/CPFP, though,
provided wallets give users a good (semi-automated?) interface for such
transaction replacements/chains.
--
Martin Lie
š Original message:Peter Todd wrote:
> Re: "dropped in an unpredictable way" - transactions would be dropped
> lowest fee/KB first, a completely predictable way.
It would be 'completely predictable' for whoever knew the state and
policies of a miner's mempool, but from an end user's perspective that
wouldn't matter much: The end users wouldn't know if their
transaction(s) would make the cut or not, somewhere in the network, and
by what time. They (obviously) won't know what miners will find the next
block(s), they won't know the miners' mempool sizes, potential custom
eviction policies, etc.
I agree that this can be somewhat remedied by FSSRBF/CPFP, though,
provided wallets give users a good (semi-automated?) interface for such
transaction replacements/chains.
--
Martin Lie