Abstract: On 18th April 2019, the BitMEX Research Bitcoin Cash SV node experienced 2 block re-organisations. First a 3 block re-organisation, followed by a 6 block re-organisation. In this brief piece, we provide data and graphics related to the temporary chainsplit. The chainsplit appears to be caused by large blocks which took too long to propagate, rather than consensus related issues. Our analysis shows there were no double spends related to the split.
Chainsplit diagram – 18 April 2019
Source: BitMEX Research
Notes: The above image indicates there were two valid competing chains and a non-consensus split occurred at block 578,639. Our node followed the chain on the left until block 578,642, then it jumped over to the right. About an hour later, it jumped back over to the left hand side. The chain on the left continued, while the chain on the right was eventually abandoned.
Chainsplit transaction data
Number of transactions |
|
| Main chain (within 6 blocks) | 754,008 |
| Fork chain | 1,050,743 |
| Overlap (within 6 blocks) | 753,945 |
| Eventual double spends | 0 |
Source: BitMEX Research
Based on our analysis of the transactions, all the TXIDs from the forked chain (on the right), eventually made it back into the main chain, with the obvious exception of the coinbase transactions. Therefore, it is our belief that no double spends occurred in relation to this incident.
Timestamps of the blocks related to the split – 18 April 2019
| Local Clock | Block Timestamp | Height | Hash | Size (MB) | Log2 Work |
| 11:39:47 | 11:39:19 | 578,638 | 000000000000000001ccdb82b9fa923323a8d605e615047ac6c7040584eb2419 | 3.1 | 87.803278 |
| 12:04:51 | 12:04:37 | 578,639 | 0000000000000000090a43754c9c3ffb3627a929a97f3a7c37f3dee94e1fc98f | 8.6 | 87.803280 |
| 12:28:01 | 12:20:36 | 578,640 | 00000000000000000211d3b3414c5cb3e795e3784da599bcbb17e6929f58cc09 | 52.2 | 87.803282 |
| 12:43:42 | 12:29:39 | 578,641 | 0000000000000000050c01ee216586175d15b683f26adcfdd9dd0be4b1742e9e | 42.1 | 87.803285 |
| 12:59:27 | 12:51:40 | 578,642 | 00000000000000000a7a25cea40cb57f5fce3b492030273b6f8a52f99f4bf2a8 | 76.2 | 87.803287 |
| 13:05:18 | 12:32:39 | 578,640 | 000000000000000007ad01e93696a2f93a31c35ab014d6c43597fd4fd6ba9590 | 35.5 | 87.803282 |
| 13:05:18 | 12:33:16 | 578,641 | 0000000000000000033ed7d3b1a818d82483ade2ee8c31304888932b7729f692 | 0.1 | 87.803285 |
| 13:05:18 | 12:41:38 | 578,642 | 00000000000000000ae4a0d81d4c219139c22ba1a8a42d72b960d63a9e157914 | 1.0 | 87.803287 |
| 13:05:19 | 12:56:37 | 578,643 | 00000000000000000590821ac2eb1d3c0e4e7edab586c16d5072ec0c77a980dc | 0.8 | 87.803289 |
| 13:19:36 | 13:14:22 | 578,644 | 0000000000000000001ae8668e9ab473f8862dc081f7ac65e6df9ded635d338e | 128.0 | 87.803291 |
| 13:21:56 | 13:18:07 | 578,645 | 0000000000000000049efe9a6e674370461c78845b98c4d045fe9cd5cb9ea634 | 107.2 | 87.803293 |
| 14:12:54 | 13:15:36 | 578,643 | 0000000000000000016b62ec5523a1afe25672abd91fe67602ea69ee2a2b871f | 23.8 | 87.803289 |
| 14:12:55 | 13:43:35 | 578,644 | 000000000000000003e9d9be8a7b9fc64ef1d3494d1b0f4c11845882643a6439 | 1.3 | 87.803291 |
| 14:12:55 | 14:01:34 | 578,645 | 0000000000000000052be8613e79b33a9959535551217d7fdacc2d0c1db1e672 | 0.0 | 87.803293 |
| 14:12:55 | 14:06:35 | 578,646 | 00000000000000000475ab103a92eb6cb1c3c666cd9af7b070e09b3a35a15d66 | 0.0 | 87.803296 |
| 14:27:09 | 14:24:37 | 578,647 | 0000000000000000062bade37849ade3e3c4dfa9289d7f5f6d203ae188e94e4f | 77.0 | 87.803298 |
Source: BitMEX Research
If one is interested, we have provided the above table which discloses all the relevant details of the blocks related to the chainsplit, including:
- The block timestamps
- The local clock timestamps
- The block hashes
- The block sizes
- The total accumulated PoW up to each block
With the above details one can follow what occurred in relation to the chainsplit and create a timeline.
Conclusion
Our primary motivation for providing this information and analysis is not driven by an interest in Bitcoin Cash SV, but instead a desire to develop systems to analyse and detect these type of events on the Bitcoin network. Systems are being developed on our website, https://forkmonitor.info, to help detect chainsplits, caused either by poor block propagation or consensus related issues. This event on Bitcoin Cash SV is good practice for us.
As for Bitcoin Cash SV, the block sizes were particularly large during the period of the re-organisations. On the forked chain, the last two blocks were 128MB and 107MB respectively. On the main chain many of the blocks were over 50MB. Therefore, in our view, it is likely the large sizes of the blocks were the root cause of the re-organisations, as miners couldn’t propagate and verify these large blocks fast enough, before other blocks on different chains were found.
As for the implications this has on Bitcoin Cash SV, we have no comment. We will leave that to others.