Heard some (all/most/many) relays do not number events they receive and broadcast. Is that true? Wouldn’t it reduce load on both relays and clients and optimise event search?
Are there some difficulties preventing operators from numbering events in chronological order?
Tagging some of the warriors..
#[0] #[1] #[2]
👀
👀
Taking a guess here to test my primitive understanding: How do you tell who has the correct timestamp if relay X sees event A at time M, and relay Y sees event A at time N?
I think the relays can
agree on event ID based on signature. Not sure about the timekeeping piece.
Is timestamp passed by the first relay to see an event (i.e. oldest stamp)?
You can’t have time stamps without proof of work, like bitcoin. Defining time was one of the most difficult tasks satoshi had to solve. Gigi’s piece bitcoin is time explains this concept in depth. Mind blowing read, highly recommend. #[7]
NIP-01 states JSON relay filter that includes
since":
"until":
Just thinking out loud - does it make sense if event number on one relay would differ from another relay?
What I as a non-tech kinda guy understand is that clients have to somehow realize when they stoped monitoring a relay (when the nostrich goes to sleep) to then come back to it in a few hours and ask for events starting from a certain point. So if the client does not know the ordinal number of the event it last saw, it has to explain how far into the past he wants to dig, e.g. specifying dates or smth else.
If I’m right, then events don’t have to be unilaterally numbered. Only clients will have to memorise particular event number last seen with each relay.
