From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Service bits for pruned nodes
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 18:44:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjz8SbqU=2YXrXzwzmvz+NUbokD6KbPwZ5QAXSqCdi++g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3FA-5z3gAC1aYbG2EOKM2eDyv7zX3S9+ia2ZJ0LPkKiA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2452 bytes --]
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net> wrote:
> I'd imagined that nodes would be able to pick their own ranges to keep
> rather than have fixed chosen intervals. "Everything or two weeks" is
> rather restrictive - presumably node operators are constrained by physical
> disk space, which means the quantity of blocks they would want to keep can
> vary with sizes of blocks, cost of storage, etc.
>
Sure, that's why eventually several levels may be useful.
Adding new fields to the addr message and relaying those fields to newer
> nodes means every node could advertise the height at which it pruned. I
> know it means a longer time before the data is available everywhere vs
> service bits, but it seems like most nodes won't be pruning right away
> anyway. There's plenty of time for upgrades.
>
That's a more flexible model, indeed. I'm not sure how important speed of
propagation will be though - it may be very slow, given that there are
100000s of IPs circulating, and only a few are relayed in one go between
nodes. Even then, I'd like to see the "relay/validation" responsibility
split off from the "serve historic data" one, and have separate service
bits for those.
> If an old node connected to a new node and getdata-d blocks that had been
> pruned, immediate disconnection should make the old node go find a
> different one. It means the combination of old node+not run for a long time
> might take a while before it can find a node that has what it wants, but
> that doesn't seem like a big deal.
>
Disconnecting in case something is requested that isn't served seems like
an acceptable behaviour, yes. A specific message indicating data is pruned
may be more flexible, but more complex to handle too.
What is the use case for NODE_VALIDATE? Nodes that throw away blocks almost
> immediately? Why would a node do that?
>
NODE_VALIDATE doesn't say anything about which blocks are available, it
just means it relays and validates (and thus is not an SPV node). It can be
combined with NODE_BLOCKS_2016 if those blocks are also served.
The reason for splitting them is that I think over time these may be
handled by different implementations. You could have stupid
storage/bandwidth nodes that just keep the blockchain around, and others
that validate it. Even if that doesn't happen implementation-wise, I think
these are sufficiently independent functions to start thinking about them
as such.
--
Pieter
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3538 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-28 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-28 15:51 Pieter Wuille
2013-04-28 16:29 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-28 16:44 ` Pieter Wuille [this message]
2013-04-28 16:57 ` Mike Hearn
2013-05-03 12:30 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-05-03 14:06 ` Mike Hearn
2013-05-03 14:18 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-03 15:02 ` Mike Hearn
2013-05-03 15:11 ` Peter Todd
2013-05-04 18:07 ` John Dillon
2013-05-04 18:55 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-05 13:12 ` John Dillon
2013-05-06 8:19 ` Mike Hearn
2013-05-06 13:13 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-04-28 19:50 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-04-29 2:57 ` John Dillon
2013-04-29 3:36 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-04-29 3:42 ` Robert Backhaus
2013-04-29 3:48 ` John Dillon
2013-04-29 3:55 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-29 6:10 ` Jay F
[not found] ` <CAFBxzACw=G7UgG853zQrM-Z1-B4VqSQR5YUJQ5n1=wnv7EyWsw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-30 16:14 ` [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: " Rebroad (sourceforge)
2013-04-30 18:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-04-30 19:27 ` Andy Parkins
2013-04-30 19:31 ` Simon Barber
2013-04-30 20:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-01 14:05 ` Andy Parkins
2013-05-01 14:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-01 14:34 ` Andy Parkins
2013-04-30 20:06 ` [Bitcoin-development] " Brenton Camac
2013-05-01 13:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-16 11:26 Ricardo Filipe
2013-05-16 15:47 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-05-16 16:23 ` Ricardo Filipe
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='CAPg+sBjz8SbqU=2YXrXzwzmvz+NUbokD6KbPwZ5QAXSqCdi++g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=pieter.wuille@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
/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