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...)