A Double -Follow Spring Sword (Segwit): canceled the purpose of the size and weight of the virtual bip141
transaction
In the world of CRIPTO currency such as Ethereum, the concept of virtual transactions is a critical aspect that allows the fast and effective data transfer between the knots. However, as far as any complex technical features are concerned, the decision to define two separate parameters for size and weight of transactions has caused a discussion between developers, researchers and users. In this article, we will deepen the story of a separate witness (Segwit), especially BIP141, his purpose and reason why he defines the size and weight of the virtual transaction.
What is Segwit?
Segwit was an update proposed network Bitcoin in 2017, which aimed to significantly increase the capacity of transactions without introducing a new block size. The basic idea behind Segwit is to reduce the overload associated with each block of Blockchain, which facilitates the welcome of multiple transactions without slowing down the entire network.
BIP141: Critical component of Segwita
BIP 141 (a protocol of segregated witnesses) was a fundamental component in the development and implementation of SEGWIT. Defined two separate parameters for the size and weight of virtual transactions:
- Virtual transaction dimensions (VTS)
: BIP 141 sets the maximum size limit for one block, which is currently set at 4 MB. This parameter determines how much data can be archived within each block.
- Weight : Another parameter defines the amount of memory necessary to store metadatts in each block, known as the severity of the transaction. In other words, it determines how much of bytes data is required to present a unique transaction.
Why define both?
So why bip 141 defines vt and weight? It is not a respected decision; There is a theoretical base for this approach. The idea is that if transactions are stored in metadodaks without blocks (ie only real data), they can potentially fill the entire blocks with only transaction and data. This would lead to the missed space on Blockchain, which may include increasing the storage costs.
However, with the introduction of both parameters, BIP 141 guarantees:
- Transactions can be effectively stored in a block without waste too much memory.
- The size of each transaction is carefully calibrated to optimize the most important information (ie data) by minimizing the general costs.
Master -sized compromise
There is another interesting aspect to consider. Theoretically, if we only use one parameter, we could end up with a situation in which:
- The weight of the transaction is too low, leading to the lost space in the blocks.
- The size of the virtual transaction is too large, with consequent times of creating with slower blocks.
Introducing both VT and weight, BIP 141 affects the balance between these competitive requirements. This double approach allows the network to adjust to changing the use model, at the same time ensuring that transactions remain effectively preserved within the blocks.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the definition of BIP 141 size virtual transactions (VT) and weight provides a solid base for Segwit, allowing Ethereum to climb to support multiple transactions without sacrificing performance. The double approach also emphasizes the complexity and shades included in the design of safe and effective blockchain architecture such as Ethereum.
While the landscape of the crypto currency continues to develop, it will be crucial to monitor the impact of BIP 141 on performance, scalability and experience of the entire user. Understanding the purpose and implication of this function, developers, researchers and users can better appreciate the intricate details that shape the Ethereum ecosystem.