Difference between revisions of "OP RETURN"
(The recommendation for BIPs is outdated. No such BIPs exist and the practice has been discouraged on the mailing list.) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
== Is storing data in the blockchain acceptable? == | == Is storing data in the blockchain acceptable? == | ||
| − | Many members of the Bitcoin community believe that use of OP_RETURN is irresponsible in part because Bitcoin was intended to provide a record for financial transactions, not a record for arbitrary data. Additionally, it is trivially obvious that the demand for external, massively-replicated data store is essentially infinite. Despite this, OP_RETURN has the advantage of not creating bogus UTXO entries, compared to some other ways of storing data in the blockchain. | + | Many members of the Bitcoin community believe that use of OP_RETURN is irresponsible in part because Bitcoin was intended to provide a record for financial transactions, not a record for arbitrary data. Additionally, it is trivially obvious that the demand for external, massively-replicated data store is essentially infinite. Despite this, OP_RETURN has the advantage of not creating bogus [[UTXO]] entries, compared to some other ways of storing data in the blockchain. |
From [https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0#opreturn-and-data-in-the-block-chain Bitcoin Core release 0.9.0]: | From [https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0#opreturn-and-data-in-the-block-chain Bitcoin Core release 0.9.0]: | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
== OP_RETURN applications == | == OP_RETURN applications == | ||
| − | OP_RETURN can be used for digital asset proof-of-ownership, and has at times been used to convey additional information needed to send transactions (see [[ | + | OP_RETURN can be used for digital asset proof-of-ownership, and has at times been used to convey additional information needed to send transactions (see [[ECDH address]]). |
{{DISPLAYTITLE:OP_RETURN}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:OP_RETURN}} | ||
Latest revision as of 12:54, 27 June 2020
OP_RETURN is a script opcode used to mark a transaction output as invalid. Since any outputs with OP_RETURN are provably unspendable, OP_RETURN outputs can be used to burn bitcoins.
Is storing data in the blockchain acceptable?
Many members of the Bitcoin community believe that use of OP_RETURN is irresponsible in part because Bitcoin was intended to provide a record for financial transactions, not a record for arbitrary data. Additionally, it is trivially obvious that the demand for external, massively-replicated data store is essentially infinite. Despite this, OP_RETURN has the advantage of not creating bogus UTXO entries, compared to some other ways of storing data in the blockchain.
From Bitcoin Core release 0.9.0:
This change is not an endorsement of storing data in the blockchain. The OP_RETURN change creates a provably-prunable output, to avoid data storage schemes – some of which were already deployed – that were storing arbitrary data such as images as forever-unspendable TX outputs, bloating bitcoin's UTXO database.
Storing arbitrary data in the blockchain is still a bad idea; it is less costly and far more efficient to store non-currency data elsewhere.
OP_RETURN applications
OP_RETURN can be used for digital asset proof-of-ownership, and has at times been used to convey additional information needed to send transactions (see ECDH address).
