On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 04:46:41PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: > Well, miners are all supposed to be more or less equivalent - modulo > differences in tx acceptance policies - so I'd hope that having out of bad > fee mechanisms yet still broadcasting the TX isn't that common. If it was > broadcasted, it should get mined in short order, otherwise things are going > wrong.
Eligius has contracts to do transaction mining, and it's currently 10% of the hashing power. As I said elsewhere, a good use-case for OOB fee payment is for merchants who use the payment protocol, and want to get their customers transactions mined as efficiently and cheaply as possible. (child-pays-for-parent has more blockchain bloat and thus extra expense) > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Peter Todd <p...@petertodd.org> wrote: > > > Anyway, in what circumstance would a customer want an exclusive contract > > with a miner? > > > > I was thinking for transactions that aren't standard so have to be > submitted to miners directly. Sure, but even then there's no harm in letting more than one miner know about it. There's even an existing form of this: P2Pool lets shares be accompanied by up to 50KB worth of transactions of any form. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000d2860c825ea223b805c60a33b26b9b70616698033d360b066
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
