Re: [bitcoin-dev] Defining a min spec

From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail•com>
To: Jeremy Rubin <jeremy.l.rubin.travel@gmail•com>
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Defining a min spec
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 23:25:03 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADm_WcbufxsR+MrJ3hkMY60QC9a0v7xKf5VJkK59zxi5pwQxJQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ+8mEM-MfRTTTK6-QnrvVtC63N5DZL6PiWSxsqTNm0KSYo=KQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3245 bytes --]

If the freedom to pick architecture exists, Moxie is a nice, compact, easy
to audit alternative:
     http://moxielogic.org/blog/pages/architecture.html
     https://github.com/jgarzik/moxiebox

Scaling can occur at the core level, rather than hyper-pipelining, keeping
the architecture itself nice and clean and simple.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Jeremy Rubin <
jeremy.l.rubin.travel@gmail•com> wrote:

> Might I suggest that the min-spec, if developed, target the RISC-V Rocket
> architecture (running on FPGA, I suppose) as a reference point for
> performance? This may be much lower performance than desirable, however, it
> means that we don't lock people into using large-vendor chipsets which have
> unknown, or known to be bad, security properties such as Intel AMT.
>
> In general, targeting open hardware seems to me to be more critical than
> performance metrics for the long term health of Bitcoin, however,
> performance is still important.
>
> Does anyone know how the RISC-V FPGA performance stacks up to, say, a
> Raspberry Pi?
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:52 PM, Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna•org> wrote:
>
>> I'm also a user who runs a full node, and I also like this idea. I think
>> Gavin has done some back-of-the-envelope calculations around this stuff,
>> but nothing so clearly defined as what you propose.
>>
>> On 07/02/2015 08:33 AM, Mistr Bigs wrote:
>>
>>> I'm an end user running a full node on an aging laptop.
>>> I think this is a great suggestion! I'd love to know what system
>>> requirements are needed for running Bitcoin Core.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Jean-Paul Kogelman
>>> <jeanpaulkogelman@me•com <mailto:jeanpaulkogelman@me•com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     I’m a game developer. I write time critical code for a living and
>>>     have to deal with memory, CPU, GPU and I/O budgets on a daily basis.
>>>     These budgets are based on what we call a minimum specification (of
>>>     hardware); min spec for short. In most cases the min spec is based
>>>     on entry model machines that are available during launch, and will
>>>     give the user an enjoyable experience when playing our games.
>>>     Obviously, we can turn on a number of bells and whistles for people
>>>     with faster machines, but that’s not the point of this mail.
>>>
>>>     The point is, can we define a min spec for Bitcoin Core? The number
>>>     one reason for this is: if you know how your changes affect your
>>>     available budgets, then the risk of breaking something due to
>>>     capacity problems is reduced to practically zero.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5378 bytes --]