From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WzTlg-0005wf-Uo for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:40:24 +0000 Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WzTlf-0000Rw-Rs for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:40:24 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l4so840873lbv.0 for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=F0aDiyLTeNYpXtCBHTMfn62b0rok98o5deXVQyjV97U=; b=Gm4q8q2II/PpMTv0MOQaJM4fptreBcqIWalY2UAu9yPMQ7FYxEcvdUwC2jgxn30e3O m6Ccr9qAYKQPozLU1dClABBoo6F8ImKQGl8CJZXgBdD9cWBd8XxhPd6K1RtsgFutG1NK YzNdO6ofoeXDASvpv+fWaMnrBoo4oVoEu9oE/+f7395QJ8kut3i6Wgix3EgBsWTcJOvm PaeqhP9Om8Qa8uH0keeap31r59AGxCNqVAccEFNxsAHu2biWp2URIfFe5h3kG7qHNvO/ Af74xbt6Lp+3MF4JSKN5C3LnUDi1jDGt39sAUg78mEGZ3C1y9wHqAP5T82UwzrJJVwpo 3yAg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnSZTc1aC5n1zCNF/AC10GhjunaEnWHMFM5oorCoXXK164C0FG6gXwOim4c9bKgSzdn8T7C MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.122.113 with SMTP id lr17mr560333lbb.105.1403628017066; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.185.4 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [85.53.135.230] In-Reply-To: <53A99A55.1020506@gmail.com> References: <53A99A55.1020506@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 18:40:16 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Justus Ranvier Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1WzTlf-0000Rw-Rs Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Plans to separate wallet from core 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: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:40:25 -0000 On 6/24/14, Justus Ranvier wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 06/24/2014 09:07 AM, Wladimir wrote: >> My main argument for the split is that full nodes and wallets have >> completely different usage scenarios: >> >> - A wallet should be online as little as possible, ideally only >> when you do transactions or want to check for them. >> >> - A full node should be online 24/7 or it is virtually useless to >> the network. > > I think btcd has done this right. > > A wallet is a daemon that runs constantly in the background, just like > the full node. > > The GUI (which is distinct from the wallet) runs as little as > possible. Presumably there's no need for a 1:1 relationship between > wallets and GUIs. I think he means that the wallet shouldn't be running as much as it is currently doing. But yes, I think you're right about wallets and GUIs not necessarily mapping 1:1.