4 ms·
No it did not. Bitcoin has trouble because there was a parameter in Berkeley DB that nobody thought would ever be hit (the number of locks associated with a par
by nwh 13y ago
No it did not. Bitcoin has trouble because there was a parameter in Berkeley DB that nobody thought would ever be hit (the number of locks associated with a particular table). They'd tested against this and believed the value to be enough, except that in very rare cases when values outside what they thought possible caused some nodes to reject a particular block. With a portion of the network seeing the block as invalid, the consensus was broken and the chain forked.
There were test cases, peer review and discussion about the potential problems. None of those occurred with dogecoin, who had a rabid developer changing values without understanding what they did.
- dragontamer 13y agoWhich is fine, because Dogecoin is not designed to be a longterm store of value. As far as I'm concerned, Dogecoin having more Transactions / day makes it far far more successful than BTC. BTC, despite being a better store of value, is literally affecting fewer people, because everyone is so obsessed with hoarding the dang thing. Dogecoin takes the whole approach and makes a joke of it... and that is why it will be a perfectly fine transaction medium.
- rmc 13y agoAnd yet there was a fork with a minor point upgrade. Did anyone see the fork happening?