Ethereum: Great discussion on block size
Since its inception, there has been a discussion on the increase in the size of the Ethereum Blockchain block. It is increasingly obvious to network scales and congestion, both supporters and opponents make strong arguments to encourage the community.
Arguments for increased block size boundary:
- Scaling : The current block size limit is the main obstacle for Ethereum scales. If the network is carrying out more than 1 million operations per second (TPS), increasing the block size limit could be performed more at the same time without using convenience or user experience at the same time.
2.
- Improved user experience : Increased processing power and reduced congestion, users should be able to enjoy faster operation times and lower delay when communicating with the network.
- Competitive advantage
: When more developers move their projects to Ethereum or explore alternative platforms, increasing the block size limit, Ethereum would give a competitive advantage over adoption and market share.
Arguments before increased block size limit:
1
2.
- Reducing suitability for use : Excessive operation fees and slower processing time can cause negative user experience by reducing adoption percentages on the platform.
- Alternative Solutions
: Some claim that alternative solutions such as proof of shares (POS) or other mechanisms of consensus are more efficient and modified than increasing the block size limit.
Fast point list:
Proponents of an increased block size limit:
- Increasing the block size limit would make it possible to faster operation time and lower delay.
- This would reduce operation fees, which will make Ethereum a more attractive platform for a wide -scale platform platform.
- The higher limit of the block size would give developers more flexibility to create complex and large -scale operations.
Opponents of an increased block size limit:
- Increasing the block size threshold would increase energy consumption and contribute to environmental problems.
- Optimizing network architecture would be difficult and expensive, which would reduce its overall efficiency.
- Excessive operation fees and slower processing time can cause negative user experience.
- Alternative solutions such as POS are more efficient and replaced than increasing the block size limit.
Verdict:
Although both sides make convincing arguments, the decision to increase the size of the block size, ultimately, depends on the Ethereum community. The network continues to change and develop, and it is necessary to determine the priorities for the future amendments to the priority protocol for the priority of the scale, the comfort and the sustainability of the environment.
After all, the most effective solution can be a balanced approach that examines the problems of scaling the problem while maintaining the suitability and responsibility for the environment. This may include a gradual increase in the limit of the block over time or investigate alternative solutions such as Sharding or Off-Chain.
Conclusion:
Discussions on the increase in the size of the Ethereum block are complex and multifaceted.