(re @NoahErgo : **) I think Cheng has also helped review some ergo code if I recall correctly. These guys all know and help eachother out. UTXO Alliance :)

yes sir

(re : You can clear it and submit you...) Can you clear the mempool through swagger? Couldn't see that anywhere. And it would propogate through nodes that have 1000 limit.

(re @FlyingPig_69 : I think Cheng has also helped review some ergo...) So as you, going to help coffee in recording video on Spectrum yf?

(re @HQ3rr : So as you, going to help coffee in recording v...) I'm all out of time at the mo :(

Just provide him some context and guidance , he Will take care of all other stuff

(re : What is the reason to have a l...) You can set the limit in node config.

Every node not just miner can set a mempool size however the miners mempool sizes are more relevant, the reason to have a limit is that in cases of lots of transactions and high fees you arent holding on to transactions that wont be mined for a long time. Otherwise you would store a bunch of txs that might never be mined. It also apparently helps with non signaling RBF if most nodes keep a smaller mempool

Lastly, having a larger mempool hurts the propagation of non-signaling replacement transactions. Users may create replacement transactions for their original low fee transactions even if they did not opt in to RBF. They are able to successfully do this when most nodes evict the transaction, which they can generally learn by observing a default mempool's evictions.

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/118137/how-does-it-contribute-to-the-bitcoin-network-when-i-run-a-node-with-a-bigger-th

No way to do it via swagger as far as I can tell but I think if the fee increase is natural and you were to do this you would struggle to get your tx to propagate to other nodes during the fee increase

(re : Every node not just miner can s...) Interesting article....I have a feeling some ergo miners run a smaller mempool limit. There are 2 that consistently process less TXs than others.

yea it is possible, ultimately node runners should be able to propagate txs to them still but as for how many is up to the miner. So you can still run a larger mempool as a node runner and not affect anything too much I think.

Thanks 👍 And what was the motivation behind supporting RBF? I know that, for example, BCH dropped RBF to have more reliable and instant 0-conf transactions.

Well the most used form of RBF is completely opt-in https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0125.mediawiki#motivation Without it your transaction might be waiting for other people paying higher fees and you would not be able to signal that you want to bump your fee to get in the next block faster. This is for transactions that are time-critical mainly.

Yes, but it makes 0-conf unreliable to use for payments because one can cancel the transaction. Why not use something like CPFP (child pays for parent) instead to bump up the fee without the possibility to replace or cancel transactions?

might be controversial, but I don't think zero conf makes any sense

Hm, why not? Basically instant transactions if there is no RBF or other means to replace transactions or double spend the same UTXO before the transaction gets into the block.

I think it can work in some instances like very small txs that are not mission critical, it just seems like a very experimental and trust based thing. Like I could make a zero conf to buy a coffee for example, take my coffee then go submit a tx for all mycoins to another address I own. The zero conf would be invalid and I would have a free coffee

there needs to b more to it i think

whole point is to wait for tx to be deep enough so it cannot be reorganized as well, so for large txs it doesnt make sense

found this might be of interest https://gist.github.com/awemany/619a5722d129dec25abf5de211d971bd

Yes, mainly for smaller transactions but it would make the UX so much greater. On BCH they don't have neither RBF nor CPFP and transactions that try to spend the same UTXO are rejected by the miners (maybe their mempools work differently from the ones on Ergo though, I'm not sure). So 0-conf transactions are more reliable. Of course you can still double spend 0-conf transactions. For example, if you are a miner or bribe one with significant hashrate, so for larger transactions one should wait for several block confirmations. I think they implement other measures like the one you posted to discourage double spends of 0-conf and make the UX better. That's why I was wondering if Ergo does something similar.

How is storage rent collected? via https://ift.tt/x1prS0e

according to https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/4183/does-monero-have-zero-conf implementing zero conf is still doable even if the chain doesn't account for it in anyway like disabling RBF for example

Ergo go to the moon

Ergo go to 10$

$10 is not moon, we hit $20 before

$10 is stratosphere... $100 is moon

$5 is okay

Hi Ergonauts btw