i just don't understand why the difficulty is not adjusted much more gradually. Why not look at the last 2k blocks and adjust the difficulty every block accordingly.
The main issue from my understanding is that the Emergency Difficulty Adjustment is only one way. In other words, difficulty can quickly retarget downwards, but only very infrequently retargets upward. Were the EDA biderectional, I think the current problem would subside.
Why not look at the last 2k blocks and adjust the difficulty every block accordingly.
This will result in a frozen blockchain when there is a major dropoff in hashrate. Specifically, the EDA was likely engineered to accommodate the initial hashrate drop immediately following the fork. Remember that right after a hard fork, the combined difficulty of the chains doubles, while the amount of hash power stays the same. So the retargeting must occur after relatively few blocks (even if those blocks took a long time, even days).
i just don't understand why the difficulty is not adjusted much more gradually. Why not look at the last 2k blocks and adjust the difficulty every block accordingly.
The main issue from my understanding is that the Emergency Difficulty Adjustment is only one way. In other words, difficulty can quickly retarget downwards, but only very infrequently retargets upward. Were the EDA biderectional, I think the current problem would subside.
This will result in a frozen blockchain when there is a major dropoff in hashrate. Specifically, the EDA was likely engineered to accommodate the initial hashrate drop immediately following the fork. Remember that right after a hard fork, the combined difficulty of the chains doubles, while the amount of hash power stays the same. So the retargeting must occur after relatively few blocks (even if those blocks took a long time, even days).