Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SeBXb-00021r-Db for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 20:48:47 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.175; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com ([209.85.212.175]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1SeBXZ-0002eE-6y for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 20:48:47 +0000 Received: by wibhn6 with SMTP id hn6so2751731wib.10 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:48:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.142.200 with SMTP id i50mr7741421wej.47.1339447716793; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.254.232 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:48:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 22:48:36 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: dntlPUO2ATh0RaJSy0xQao6bY_c Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Gregory Maxwell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 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 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1SeBXZ-0002eE-6y Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bootstrapping full nodes post-pruning X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 20:48:47 -0000 > Actual BDB files are absolutely not deterministic. Nor is the raw > blockchain itself currently, because blocks aren't always added in the > same order (plus they get orphans in them) That's true. Though if you prune up to the last checkpoint, orphans before that point can be safely thrown away. I wonder if swapping out bdb for LevelDB might make sense at some point. I'm not sure how deterministic that is either though :)