From: "Алексей Мутовкин" <alex.mutovkin@gmail•com>
To: Nick ODell <nickodell@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Proposal of a new BIP : annual splitting blockchain database to reduce its size.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 20:37:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEadUTL49V6GXgXAfYFw_E2AHPNemZVhgZZsvqueSOovs2yRMA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANN4kmdAehrmb3KvXsS7-gZgFTLcxHFyoMimwDi1_Aohmy+PDQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2181 bytes --]
I read about prune option right now, actually i didn't hear about it before.
Yes this option can save some disk space but afaik first (awful N-days
lasting) synchronization still requires to download full database.
My approach also cuts database and replaces all old blocks (except say last
6 blocks for security reason)
with series of blocks with rolled initial totals and optionally purged from
tiny wallets crap (storing on six thousand current nodes and on the swarm
of full wallets
information that John have 100 satosi is too expensive for us and we may
annually clear that balance as fee for miners or just delete).
So almost all nodes can hold only the rolled database (i can't estimate
compression ration of the rolled database now, i am not advanced user as
you can see).
And only much less amount of archive nodes holds full expanded database.
2017-08-16 19:52 GMT+03:00 Nick ODell <nickodell@gmail•com>:
> What makes this approach better than the prune option of Bitcoin?
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Алексей Мутовкин via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Let me describe the possible improvement of the bitcoin blockchain
>> database (BBD) size in general terms.
>>
>> We can implement new routine : annual split of the BBD. Reason is that
>> 140gb full wallet unconvinience.
>>
>> BBD splits in two parts :
>> 1) old blocks before the date of split and
>> 2) new blocks, starting from first technical block with all rolled totals
>> on the date of split.
>> (also possible transfer of tiny totals due to their unprofitability
>> to the miners, so we cut long tail of tiny holders)
>> 3) old blocks packs into annual megablocks and stores in the side archive
>> chain for some needs for FBI investigations or other goals.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your attention,
>>
>> Alexey Mutovkin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3373 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-16 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAEadUTKo12vscHQUpjA16kQkrKBp34iw-JTRf0TdwUc9rqzznQ@mail.gmail.com>
2017-08-16 16:20 ` Алексей Мутовкин
2017-08-16 16:52 ` Nick ODell
2017-08-16 17:37 ` Алексей Мутовкин [this message]
2017-08-16 18:33 ` Luke Dashjr
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=CAEadUTL49V6GXgXAfYFw_E2AHPNemZVhgZZsvqueSOovs2yRMA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=alex.mutovkin@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=nickodell@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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