If there are really so few OP_RETURN outputs more than 144 bytes, then
why increase the limit if that change is so controversial? It seems
people who want to use a larger OP_RETURN size do it anyway, even with
the current default limits.
On 10/4/25 00:15, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2025 at 02:59:32PM +0000, Andrew Poelstra wrote:
If "it's cheaper to use witness data" were enough of a barrier, nobody
would be using OP_RETURN outputs today except for opentimestamps and
maybe some other super-low-load applications.
It isn't chepaer to use witness data until you're publishing more than
~143 bytes of data, due to the overhead of the setup transaction. (It's
also not cheaper if you want extremely easy proof of publication of
the data)
Excluding the couple of months between the topic of increasing the
OP_RETURN limit was raised on this list and the increased limit was
merged into Bitcoin Core master, there have, in fact, been very few
OP_RETURN outputs generated that are above the ~143B size. In particular,
between blocks 900k and 915,843 I get:
15,003,149 total OP_RETURN outputs
131 OP_RETURN outputs larger than 83 bytes
81 OP_RETURN outputs of 144 bytes or more
19,707 OP_RETURN outputs with non-zero value
cf https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33453#issuecomment-3341177765
Cheers,
aj
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin
Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/83c68b1f-7b92-4a28-a79a-02d56eff2c84%40activediscovery.net.
