Merge #10232: [0.14] release-notes: Accurately explain getblocktemplate improvements
38ab0a7
release-notes: Accurately explain getblocktemplate improvements (Luke Dashjr)
Tree-SHA512: b519431d5009c5bdb7511e46c9dec05370ba62d70f5f6a9d00b82d190581b937e34d29c32c3795f4f219288d40695091cfe60ec93b3c40c01ab72d9232064c04
This commit is contained in:
commit
964a185cc8
|
@ -45,14 +45,18 @@ using these calls with named arguments needs to be updated.
|
|||
Mining
|
||||
------
|
||||
|
||||
Getblocktemplate sets the segwit version bit even when the downstream
|
||||
client has not been updated to include the segwit commitment. Ability
|
||||
to enforce the rule is the only required criteria for safe activation,
|
||||
but previously signaling was only requested if the miner could include
|
||||
transactions in order to avoid a potential outcome where segwit would
|
||||
activate at a time when no segwit transactions could be included.
|
||||
Since many miners are now including the segwit commitment this concern
|
||||
no longer applies.
|
||||
In previous versions, getblocktemplate required segwit support from downstream
|
||||
clients/miners once the feature activated on the network. In this version, it
|
||||
now supports non-segwit clients even after activation, by removing all segwit
|
||||
transactions from the returned block template. This allows non-segwit miners to
|
||||
continue functioning correctly even after segwit has activated.
|
||||
|
||||
Due to the limitations in previous versions, getblocktemplate also recommended
|
||||
non-segwit clients to not signal for the segwit version-bit. Since this is no
|
||||
longer an issue, getblocktemplate now always recommends signalling segwit for
|
||||
all miners. This is safe because ability to enforce the rule is the only
|
||||
required criteria for safe activation, not actually producing segwit-enabled
|
||||
blocks.
|
||||
|
||||
UTXO memory accounting
|
||||
----------------------
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue