Well because in the example i gave you this decreases the miner's reward. The
rule of increasing feerate you stated isn't always economically rationale.
Note how it can also be extended, for instance if the miner only has 1.5vMB of
txs and is not assured to receive enough transactions to fill 2 blocks he might
be interested in maximizing absolute fees, not feerate.
Sure, we could make the argument that long term we need a large backlog of
transactions anyways.. But that'd be unfortunately not in phase with today's
reality.
-------- Original Message --------
On Feb 11, 2022, 00:51, James O'Beirne wrote:
>> It's not that simple. As a miner, if i have less than 1vMB of transactions
>> in my mempool. I don't want a 10sats/vb transaction paying 100000sats by a
>> 100sats/vb transaction paying only 10000sats.
>
> I don't understand why the "<1vMB in the mempool" case is even worth
> consideration because the miner will just include the entire mempool in the
> next block regardless of feerate.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
