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 <grarpamp@gmail.com>) id 1TCM7Z-0004xm-8x
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:59:09 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.219.47 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.219.47; envelope-from=grarpamp@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-oa0-f47.google.com; 
Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.219.47])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1TCM7Y-0001y8-M4
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:59:09 +0000
Received: by oagn9 with SMTP id n9so2635550oag.34
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.170.229 with SMTP id ap5mr1139073oec.101.1347591543115;
	Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.152.129 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAMGNxUt8ic39pdq1zobSF0khR_vOixTDZMSixAhWTLd2hLMVAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANg8-dCUC=qEqBSay5VKdqZOwEnx_UxYrT2LbV+20Vb1FbCJ1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD2Ti28-gxXwJF4MXEHO9o4_4Z7hsNM7T9XQRX1K8Q2OLmB+mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMGNxUt8ic39pdq1zobSF0khR_vOixTDZMSixAhWTLd2hLMVAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:59:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD2Ti29fRiqfSzv8-MdLQg+s+0kHCSEEME=XiY687N7DnM0Lag@mail.gmail.com>
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/)
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
	(grarpamp[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
	0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1TCM7Y-0001y8-M4
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] separate out blockchain db and wallet to
 two dirs?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:59:09 -0000

> I like this idea, although I would say the blockchain should go in /var/lib/bitcoin
> by default, right? I'm just a longtime LInux guy, not a formal sysadmin, though.

Further, bitcoin doesn't allow easy separation of the files without
detachdb (off by default), nor does it supply a user agnostic system
daemon to do the block processing separately from user wallet ops.
So I would suggest until then it remain split up somewhere under
.bitcoin rather than in /var or anywhere else.