On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:43 PM, praxeology_guy via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> TL;DR: using spentness bits scales linearly... vs swapping digest leafs
> with empties can scale with logorithmically increasing storage
> requirements. So if you are using a 32 byte h
TL;DR: using spentness bits scales linearly... vs swapping digest leafs with
empties can scale with logorithmically increasing storage requirements. So if
you are using a 32 byte hash and spentness bits, you are pretty much limited to
only being able to prune 8 to 12 layers. This corresponds to
Bram Cohen,
My apologies, I guess I glossed over your "The TXO bitfield" because by subject
I thought it just had something to do with changing the txo's data structure.
Yes what you are proposing with "The TXO bitfield" is pretty much exactly the
same as the MMR data structure... EXCEPT yours
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 6:58 PM, praxeology_guy <
praxeology_...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Bram Cohen,
>
> In R&D: First its appropriate to explore all interesting ideas, and help
> each other improve their ideas. Last, when there is a deadline that needs
> to be met, we compare various options and
Bram Cohen,
In R&D: First its appropriate to explore all interesting ideas, and help each
other improve their ideas. Last, when there is a deadline that needs to be met,
we compare various options and decide on which to go with.
I'm on the First step still.
If you really want to push me to say
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 6:10 PM, praxeology_guy via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> With using the MMR data structure for txo commitments, its preferable that
> wallets only keep information pertinent to their own spendable coins. In
> previous communication we talk
ubject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Guessing the spentness status of the pruned relatives
Local Time: April 1, 2017 6:38 PM
UTC Time: April 1, 2017 11:38 PM
From: b...@cock.lu
To: praxeology_guy , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
If a wallet is unaware of spends of its own coins (ie, transactions
were made it can&#x
If a wallet is unaware of spends of its own coins (ie, transactions
were made it can't have known about), there's probably bigger problems
going on. You might enjoy the topic on this mailing list on committed
bloom filters however, as this solves a similar issue without needing
an ever-growing lis
Bitcoin nodes could also keep a spentness status list, where each bit in the
spentness status list corresponds to whether a txo in the MMR is spent. This
could make it so that disconnected wallets didn't have to guess the pruned
relative spentness status when it reconnects to the network... and
