A standard transaction is 225 bytes, leading to a savings of 8.6%.
However, that is essentially the minimum saving. For other sizes (eg, 10
outputs) which seem to be pretty frequent savings can be greater.
Furthermore, it is important to note that this is a memory saving for the
UTXO pool so the
Quoting Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev
:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
It also requires most clients to be updated to support the new address
system.
That's the killer: introducing Yet Another Type of Bitcoin
I think the catch here is that under STUA (short term use address) there is
a strict incentive, you can reduce the transaction fee for these txns. This
also fits with the general model that you pay the miners for security. My
belief is that when there is a savings benefit to be had large players wi
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> It also requires most clients to be updated to support the new address
> system.
That's the killer: introducing Yet Another Type of Bitcoin Address takes a
very long time and requires a
Rather than re-enable OP_LEFT, a NOP could be re-purposed in a soft fork.
OP_DUP OP_HASH160 [pubKeyHash[:LEN_PARAM]] [LEN_PARAM] OP_LEFTEQUALVERIFY
OP_DROP OP_CHECKSIG
A B L OP_LEFTEQUALVERIFY checks if the leftmost L bytes of A and B match.
If not, then the script immediately fails. If either a
While we're all debating the block size, please review this proposal to
modestly increase the number of transactions per block.
https://gist.github.com/JeremyRubin/4d17d28d5c681a93fa63
Best,
Jeremy
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfo
