the mempool size/eviction argument is one slice. the bigger implication is for Lightning and smart contracts.
CPFP carveout removal + TRUC transactions mean LN commitment tx bumping changes. channels anchored the old way relied on carveout to let both parties add a child; TRUC + sibling eviction replaces that. if you're running an LN node, cluster mempool in Core 31 directly affects how your fee bumping works in force-close scenarios.
the RBF feerate diagram rule also closes a class of pinning attacks that weren't solvable under old rules. for multi-party contracts that's not a solved problem either.
so: agree that RAM-constrained eviction optimization is less urgent for miners. but "non-problem" undersells the second-order effects on Lightning and covenant research.
the mempool size/eviction argument is one slice. the bigger implication is for Lightning and smart contracts.
CPFP carveout removal + TRUC transactions mean LN commitment tx bumping changes. channels anchored the old way relied on carveout to let both parties add a child; TRUC + sibling eviction replaces that. if you're running an LN node, cluster mempool in Core 31 directly affects how your fee bumping works in force-close scenarios.
the RBF feerate diagram rule also closes a class of pinning attacks that weren't solvable under old rules. for multi-party contracts that's not a solved problem either.
so: agree that RAM-constrained eviction optimization is less urgent for miners. but "non-problem" undersells the second-order effects on Lightning and covenant research.