in

The LightningNetwork has a theoretical throughput of 40 million TPS. That’s the equivalent of 14.4 TB size blocks every 10 min. Lightning enables Bitcoin to be a planetary scale decentralized medium of exchange. ⚡️

The LightningNetwork has a theoretical throughput of 40 million TPS. That’s the equivalent of 14.4 TB size blocks every 10 min. Lightning enables Bitcoin to be a planetary scale decentralized medium of exchange. ⚡️



View Reddit by Bitcoin_is_plan_AView Source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

28 Comments

  1. Where is the underlying math? I can’t find it.

    My back of the napkin math is: [18k nodes](https://bitcoinvisuals.com/ln-nodes) * [483 max htlcs](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/93720/lightning-network-how-was-the-maximum-allowed-htlcs-in-flight-computed) / [2.8 hops on average per transaction](https://blog.dshr.org/2020/01/bitcoins-lightning-network.html?m=1) = 3.1 million tps. Still nothing to shake a stick at, but a whole order of magnitude less. That said, I believe the htlc limit could be removed entirely, because it’s only in there to make recovery doable in one transaction (according to the link i gave above). Were that done, you’d have to do math on the average transaction size and channel capacity stuff.

  2. Maybe a stupid question: but given that everything is off chain, and assuming a boundless number of nodes, why is there any TPS limit for lightning? Or is this just the TPS limit for the current number of nodes?

  3. This seems dubious. Not saying that Lightning doesn’t achieve high TPS (it clearly does), but given Lightning’s properties it seems a little nonsensical to be using numbers like this.

    For example, with Lightning I believe it’s possible to stream sats second-by-second. So let’s say that one channel can achieve 1TPS. If every UTXO in the next year were used to open up a channel, the theoretical maximum TPS would be way higher than 40m. And if you did that for another year it would be higher still. Lightning’s TPS is ultimately bounded by the number of channels, and these can increase indefinitely with time.

    Or am I misunderstanding something?

  4. Please post over at r btc to educate the bcash retards. I would do it myself but my posts are automatically censored by the sub that doesn’t censor people like r/bitcoin does…

    🤷‍♂️

  5. You’d still have to onboard everyone into Lightning which is a challenge, or else they use custodial or semi-custodial services which isn’t ideal. Besides, if we’re trying on custodial services bitcoin can serve a lot more people at the base layer than its TPS indicates.

  6. I’ve heard that Lightning has issues with send/receive on occasion — i.e., some transactions don’t work; and thus, payments made via Lightning may in-fact not go through (in some instances). That seems like a serious issue.

  7. I guess Samson Mow would know, but I thought LN did have some scaling issues, which Taproot will help us address.

    So I guess I take an optimistic but wait and see approach. I think we’re still 2-3 more improvements away. Like we need LN channels to be able to go offline and come back, and I saw Bitmex’s new blog about controlling for malicious people that try to lock up funds vs maybe locking up funds could be something they wanted to do, and then the various takes try to prevent people from maliciously abusing the LN architecture to jam it up.

    BUT since all the incentives in bitcoin are to improve it and preserve and grow value, I am optimistic

What do you think?

Bullish Solana (SOL) will Reach $300 Soon

Bullish Solana (SOL) will Reach $300 Soon

Cryptopolitan

bZx protocol suffers $55 million hack 1