Peter Todd wrote:
My solution was to simply state that vertexes that happened to cause the
tree to be unbalanced would be discarded, and set the depth of inbalance
such that this would be extremely unlikely to happen by accident. I'd
rather see someone come up with something better though.
I hope that someone else here would chime in on the issue raised in the
thread, about using a tree-structure that has multiple valid
configurations for the same set of unspent-TxOuts. If you use any
binary tree, you must replay the entire history of insertions and
deletions in the correct
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Alan Reiner etothe...@gmail.com wrote:
One app developer updates their
RB tree code which updated the RB-tree optimizations/rebalancing, and
now a significant portion of the network can't agree on the correct
root. Not only would that be disruptive, it would
On 06/19/2012 01:59 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Alan Reineretothe...@gmail.com wrote:
One app developer updates their
RB tree code which updated the RB-tree optimizations/rebalancing, and
now a significant portion of the network can't agree on the correct
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Alan Reiner etothe...@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that someone else here would chime in on the issue raised in the
thread, about using a tree-structure that has multiple valid
configurations for the same set of unspent-TxOuts. If you use any
binary tree, you
Alan Reiner wrote:
A PATRICIA tree/trie would be ideal, in my mind, as it also has a
completely deterministic structure, and is an order-of-magnitude more
space-efficient. Insert, delete and query times are still O(1).
However, it is not a trivial implementation. I have occasionally looked
6 matches
Mail list logo
