One thing that worries me a little with blockchain scaling is that the whole history is needed to guarantee its integrity. The blockchain will keep on growing, whether it grows fast or slow is not very relevant because regardless the same problem will arise which is data accumulating.
I've watch antonopoulos talk about scaling and compare blockchain to the internet, saying that blockchains will scale the same way internet scaled. This analogy is false imo, because data on the internet does not need to be permanently stored and that's the big challenge for blockchains.
Regarding your idea I think it's good but it is only slowing down the growth of the blockchain ( unless I missed something).
RE: The Concept of Hierarchical Self-Purging Blockchains Explained
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The Concept of Hierarchical Self-Purging Blockchains Explained
Actually it is relevant. If the blockchain grows slower or only as fast as the technology, we'd have no scaling issues. My "Idea" of discarding blockchains after storing the net effect of the blockchain into a new blockchain is the best solution IMO. Slowing down of growth and increasing the amount of Tx per second is actually all we need. I remember as a kid, seeing a 4GB pen drive was something huge. Now I can't even find something with such low storage capacity.
Since there are no non-technological limitations to the hierarchy, you could even make year long blocks. If an exchange do 50 million Tx in a year, we could summerize the net effect of that in a single Tx in the new yearly super-block. Make it possible to pick which blockchain level you need to operate on will make things even easier. We can have expensive Tx that only take milliseconds (for exchanges etc.) and use a daily block to send someone a birthday gift or make travel reservation for an ultra cheap cost.
Thanks for the Comment :-)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit