R/nanocurrency - Why can't we batch transactions with Nano to increase TPS?

I liked this analysis.

Right now, to the extent that I see network performance as needing attention, and considering typical load we have a lot more opportunities through standard code improvements rather than protocol changes.

The protocol changes, specifically the most difficult part to change: the signing payload, are being considered with the new state block design We can iterate on these kinds of changes but they need to be prioritized.

4 Likes

I don't consider signed timestamps a performance feature, but a security feature. I only included it in the post, because it can impact performance.

As I understand it, there are currently 2 possible spam attack vectors, BPS spam (DOS), and desync AEC.

For both, a significant knowledge and resources are required, and for desyncing AEC also luck on the side of spammer. And for both there are active counter measures available.

But code based solutions for them (bounded backlog for BPS spam, and signed timestamps for desync AEC),
would make the protocol even more trustworthy.

So from my limited protocol knowledge, I'd put signed timestamps on high priority, even though it is part of a bigger difficult task.

2 Likes