Hi bitcoin developers,

Compact block relay has been one of the concerns with divergence in mempool
policies. I tested it in knots with a pruned and non-listening node. The
results are interesting and details are shared in this post:
https://uncensoredtech.substack.com/p/compact-block-relay-with-extra-pool

I used this config for the node:

debug=cmpctblock
feefilter=0
blockreconstructionextratxnsize=300

It was running for ~10 hours and had 8 full relay outbound connections in
which 2 were bitcoin core nodes (v29.1 and v30.0) that relayed sub 1 sat/vB
transactions. 90% blocks had no issues with reconstructions because of less
transactions being requested.

Example: Block 919005

2025-10-14T09:14:50Z Saw new header
hash=00000000000000000000f76ea0d9598e36231496c732a95fab75fc91c8d5bcf2
height=919005
2025-10-14T09:14:50Z [cmpctblock] Initialized PartiallyDownloadedBlock for
block 00000000000000000000f76ea0d9598e36231496c732a95fab75fc91c8d5bcf2
using a cmpctblock of size 28617
2025-10-14T09:14:51Z [cmpctblock] Successfully reconstructed block
00000000000000000000f76ea0d9598e36231496c732a95fab75fc91c8d5bcf2 with 1 txn
prefilled, 4440 txn from mempool (incl at least 3845 from extra pool) and
235 txn requested
2025-10-14T09:14:51Z UpdateTip: new
best=00000000000000000000f76ea0d9598e36231496c732a95fab75fc91c8d5bcf2
height=919005 version=0x200c2000 log2_work=95.878521 tx=1256146478

Related pull requests:
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/pull/217
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/pull/218

Feel free to share your feedback and other ideas that can improve compact
block relay.

/dev/fd0
floppy disk guy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALiT-ZoZFZskPhA6HHguOFyD4%3D4uEXO-mvXq%2BFxURO8ELDueZA%40mail.gmail.com.