# Stats on compact block reconstructions

**URL:** <https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/stats-on-compact-block-reconstructions/1052>\
**Category:** Protocol Design\
**Created:** [August 2, 2024, 11:58am UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/stats-on-compact-block-reconstructions/1052 "2024-08-02T11:58:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 19

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![instagibbs](https://delvingbitcoin.org/user_avatar/delvingbitcoin.org/instagibbs/32/28_2.png) [@instagibbs](https://delvingbitcoin.org/u/instagibbs)\
**Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 2:16pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/stats-on-compact-block-reconstructions/1052/19 "2025-02-03T14:16:02Z")

</div>

> [@ajtowns](#):
>
> Though maybe it would be more useful to just spend that time on bringing the FIBRE patch set up to date, and having some public servers running again.

This was the end conclusion of my offline discussion with a few folks back when I was thinking harder about this. I just saw so many different reasons for misses that I felt anything that isn’t a relatively simple improvement wouldn’t be worth the lift. Second look at a p2p version of FIBRE?

---

_[View the full topic](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/stats-on-compact-block-reconstructions/1052)._