0

In regards to the scaling debate, transactions per second etc. I’m curious, and I don’t often see this mentioned. But why not add more nodes to the network to alleviate some of the load?

I’m pretty certain there’s a good reasons why not, but would actually like to know?

2

The number of nodes in the P2P network is unrelated to scalability. Due to the entire validating network operating in lock step, they all do identical work independent of their peers no matter how many of them exist in the system. One node, a thousand nodes, a million nodes all operate at the same effective speed (and the limits of the network are the same). Adding more peers actually worsens the load somewhat, as you increase the total bandwidth necessary to get the transactional data to everybody in the network quickly.

-1

the number of transactions capable of processing depends on an agreement among the community to not make blocks larger than 1mb.

nodes validate and relay transactions, but they dont register them into the blockchain.

as such, adding more nodes might lower the latency when distributing transactions, but it does not increase capacity to process transactions on the blockchain.

  • There’s no “agreement”, in so much as nobody in debating random consensus parameters. Did you personally agree that you think 20,000 signature operations are acceptable? – Anonymous Oct 28 '17 at 4:30
  • by using and participating I do agree to the parameters in use, yes. If I didn't I would choose to not participate. – Jonathan Silverblood Oct 28 '17 at 7:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.