summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorgrarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>2012-07-27 02:28:40 -0400
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2012-07-27 06:28:47 +0000
commitdee6b23c9ea60b9d5f055acfc05b30d421e9c0df (patch)
tree5e5738427b9cc39accf4db728d7659c14439e460
parent4c64f9061ce0e69dc43304791e33c628743c1c39 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-dee6b23c9ea60b9d5f055acfc05b30d421e9c0df.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-dee6b23c9ea60b9d5f055acfc05b30d421e9c0df.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues
-rw-r--r--5a/c2691e162091eb80a804b037688ff694deab7976
1 files changed, 76 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/5a/c2691e162091eb80a804b037688ff694deab79 b/5a/c2691e162091eb80a804b037688ff694deab79
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..4c058344f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/5a/c2691e162091eb80a804b037688ff694deab79
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
+ by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ (envelope-from <grarpamp@gmail.com>) id 1Sue2Z-0006S6-Ih
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 +0000
+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
+ designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
+ client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=grarpamp@gmail.com;
+ helo=mail-we0-f175.google.com;
+Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175])
+ by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
+ (Exim 4.76) id 1Sue2Y-0005Sx-IF
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 +0000
+Received: by weyr6 with SMTP id r6so1950938wey.34
+ for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
+ Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Received: by 10.216.5.213 with SMTP id 63mr695274wel.20.1343370520299; Thu, 26
+ Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
+Received: by 10.180.78.131 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
+In-Reply-To: <201207270604.01966.luke@dashjr.org>
+References: <CAD2Ti29dqCYoOMcX0zcOQnpLGCxnCjYHHqMzyyq+hvcVQ2c7nQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAAS2fgQmQ6f1_025QgJsG4aEyH4yHwk-2aWUUY+2FPs7-Tpvvg@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAD2Ti29LR+9=uO+LnrcsTYGSFW9S1FWuCLtoU-KwKkNmiVrnGQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <201207270604.01966.luke@dashjr.org>
+Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:28:40 -0400
+Message-ID: <CAD2Ti29ruBpNc6ugvYh+e5msiKZtJoe+jsyZ5GYci86t8_Hykw@mail.gmail.com>
+From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
+To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
+X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
+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
+X-Headers-End: 1Sue2Y-0005Sx-IF
+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues
+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, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 -0000
+
+> shopping.
+
+Good thing I can still spend, even with an incomplete blockchain :)
+
+> but why do you also need to encrypt 2+ GB of public record?
+
+1) I'm not seeing an option to split the wallet, debug log and other
+privates pathwise from the blockchain.
+2) Because encrypt everything is reasonable standard practice.
+https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu [ref: disputed quote]
+
+BTW, logs for this box say at least 9 days were spent attempting to
+crunch the most recent 3100 blocks before it was overrun with new
+ones and retired. (There's no formal start timestamp, just some entries...)
+
+