From 68fde6cad15d3f27ceacd1acce7b49fd43ad0c10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fabrizio Romano Genovese Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:54:15 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Typo corrected. Thanks Sam. --- _posts/2024-01-05-correctly-pricing-txs-parallel.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_posts/2024-01-05-correctly-pricing-txs-parallel.md b/_posts/2024-01-05-correctly-pricing-txs-parallel.md index 34604cd..f91dfba 100644 --- a/_posts/2024-01-05-correctly-pricing-txs-parallel.md +++ b/_posts/2024-01-05-correctly-pricing-txs-parallel.md @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ As you can see, in the net you can fire $t$ and $u$ independently, and indeed th ### And so parallel computation and parallel auctions can be independent Going back to our point, causality is what enables parallelization **both** at the computational and economic layer: Causally independent transactions - as $t$ and $u$ above - can be executed on different cores. Similarly, they do not compete for ordering in a block, and can be put into different auctions. -But you see, these two facts are **not** mutually related: Their are both caused by having causally-independent transactions (yes, pun intended and yes, this is higher-level causality!). +But you see, these two facts are **not** mutually related: They are both caused by having causally-independent transactions (yes, pun intended and yes, this is higher-level causality!). Indeed, in the (currently) non-parallel EVM we could definitely split the block not only horizontally - as in the top of the block/bottom of the block paradigm - but also vertically, allowing for multiple transactions to be top of the block and by running multiple auctions in parallel. Granted, this split only exists at 'MEV time' and the block will be fully sequentialized at 'executon time', but then again this does not matter because of the Eckmann-Hilton argument before: You can sequentialize in any ordering you want!