From: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
David Vorick <david.vorick@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Small Nodes: A Better Alternative to Pruned Nodes
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:50:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2226058.Q8lHjYE4Pt@strawberry> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFVRnypbQQ-vsSLqv48cYaqTCty4R1DmFRqfAvxe4mAqyQNXxQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday, 17 April 2017 08:54:49 CEST David Vorick via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> The best alternative today to storing the full blockchain is to run a
> pruned node
The idea looks a little overly complex to me.
I suggested something similar which is a much simpler version;
https://zander.github.io/scaling/Pruning/
> # Random pruning mode
>
> There is a large gap between the two current modes of everything
> (currently 75GB) and only what we need (2GB or so).
>
> This mode would have two areas, it would keep a days worth of blocks to
> make sure that any reorgs etc would not cause a re-download, but it would
> have additionally have an area that can be used to store historical data
> to be shared on the network. Maybe 20 or 50GB.
>
> One main feature of Bitcoin is that we have massive replication. Each node
> currently holds all the same data that every other node holds. But this
> doesn't have to be the case with pruned nodes. A node itself has no need
> for historic data at all.
>
> The suggestion is that a node stores a random set of blocks. Dropping
> random blocks as the node runs out of disk-space. Additionally, we would
> introduce a new way to download blocks from other nodes which allows the
> node to say it doesn't actually have the block requested.
>
> The effect of this setup is that many different nodes together end up
> having the total amount of blocks, even though each node only has a
> fraction of the total amount.
--
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-17 6:54 [bitcoin-dev] Small Nodes: A Better Alternative to Pruned Nodes David Vorick
2017-04-17 7:11 ` Danny Thorpe
2017-04-17 7:27 ` David Vorick
2017-04-20 15:50 ` Erik Aronesty
2017-04-20 23:42 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-04-21 13:35 ` David Kaufman
2017-04-21 15:58 ` Leandro Coutinho
2017-04-17 10:14 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-04-19 17:30 ` David Vorick
2017-04-20 9:46 ` Tom Zander
2017-04-20 20:32 ` Andrew Poelstra
2017-04-21 8:27 ` Tom Zander
2017-04-20 11:27 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-04-18 7:43 ` Jonas Schnelli
2017-04-18 10:50 ` Tom Zander [this message]
2017-04-18 13:07 ` Tier Nolan
2017-04-18 23:19 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-04-19 4:28 ` udevNull
2017-04-19 13:47 ` Angel Leon
2017-04-21 20:38 ` Gregory Maxwell
2017-04-23 16:27 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-05-03 14:03 ` Erik Aronesty
2017-05-03 19:10 ` Natanael
2017-05-03 22:45 ` Aymeric Vitte
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2226058.Q8lHjYE4Pt@strawberry \
--to=tomz@freedommail.ch \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=david.vorick@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox