From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UXXek-0003v7-8d for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 01 May 2013 14:05:14 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=andyparkins@gmail.com; helo=mail-wg0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UXXej-0003GA-I9 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 01 May 2013 14:05:14 +0000 Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id c11so1426643wgh.22 for ; Wed, 01 May 2013 07:05:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.89.234 with SMTP id br10mr3024476wjb.43.1367417107383; Wed, 01 May 2013 07:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from momentum.localnet ([91.84.15.31]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o3sm4185927wia.2.2013.05.01.07.05.05 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 01 May 2013 07:05:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Andy Parkins To: Jeff Garzik Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 15:05:03 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.8-trunk-686-pae; KDE/4.8.4; i686; ; ) References: <201304302027.10247.andyparkins@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201305011505.03860.andyparkins@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (andyparkins[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1UXXej-0003GA-I9 Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Service bits for pruned nodes X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 14:05:14 -0000 On Tuesday 30 April 2013 21:11:47 Jeff Garzik wrote: > Hardly. The storage format is bitcoin protocol wire format, plus a > tiny header. It is supported in multiple applications already, and is > the most efficient storage format for bitcoin protocol blocks. "Most efficient" for what purpose? There is more that one might do than just duplicate bitcoind exactly. I can well imagine storing bitcoin blocks parsed and separated out into database fields. > > Wouldn't it be better to add support for more bitcoin-protocol-oriented > > HTTP requests? Then any client can supply the same interface, rather > > than being forced to create blkNNNN.dat on the fly? > > You don't have to create anything on the fly, if you store blocks in > their native P2P wire protocol format. If. What if I'm writing a client and don't want to store them the way bitcoind has? > This is a whole new client interface. It's fun to dream this up, but > it is far outside the scope of an efficient HTTP protocol that > downloads blocks. Except the alternative is no schema at all -- essentially it's just give access to a file on disk. Well, that hardly needs discussion at all, and it hardly needs the involvement of bitcoind, apache could do it right now. > Your proposal is closer to a full P2P rewrite over HTTP (or a proxy > thereof). I don't think it's a "rewrite". The wire protocol is only a small part of what bitcoind does. Adding another thread listening for HTTP requests at the same time as on 8333 for stadnard format. Anyway -- I've obviously misunderstood what the idea behind a HTTP protocol was, and it's not like I was volunteering to do any of the work ;-) Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins andyparkins@gmail.com