Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCFD7D58 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:52:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pg0-f54.google.com (mail-pg0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF6F0147 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:52:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id i12so25267893pgr.3 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:52:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IufmZt2Z24rJXxhFYuW2h2mHEM0CwbT9phutR/gG1iI=; b=YLxPVgVyzLC8M/L2bv9dujdX63Smn65vXpDDEFzx4e5ZBySa/BC3Qomz5c90JGw66Q Ow5Rn0k7+FdXlcZifs0Aifa+NzNRQcHp5ELq1zu5Z+DnjksWY89ZutrWu919ZhV26oZi VdVoi/6xzCoRw+HIbY54M3NwP03YFZX06lyX3XOuQxG1QsacBBzsVcgI+9Zom6JVynYN GG85SSSDvzq7HL+TdyXtScLO7g30/nPiAiQ96o11VeJuxKMDjR3iazSdhsvbTNbBzMKt 6usp5RPVeyxlGdSUs4ZIg9tAvTgP+KQ6hF7Divc+QstDQz1+218QQ045Hgd2wh7lMzfz gs0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IufmZt2Z24rJXxhFYuW2h2mHEM0CwbT9phutR/gG1iI=; b=rvO8H4njSIkGxHOUrY8xWnStdDxm+5r9up9WOOhqOp04egGDY/Pe6SYW0+Jb2lPV6H a3eAK0wCI/+MBGLnGzf30Ifv9LlI5gUyAQa5RiU6Y98d9I/iKEbwAhERSS5jUbINaUv1 zMH1rpnqz7IfJAXICSh2EJw2+rjE+xXRD/4/yU7zgnHMZ+4Ob2Lp6gGiL7BYF69hgpgr Has7wvkl2ZBvoXY85iMIXHExE4ZQoxruJvIaj4AG+Bgk5z9etP6uZmJuCxcJE08dGbXJ S0SECmbLzilS08uFFUTkqG4t9eGbWORjrcWTbvjWNAyRQufoRFqjyhNoz9K0W0dpB8He YrLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5iIFLDUz4wzxlLQhEWWGkulPrV6wlwNDuuTyLAoyO4q28qMIOHw 3qiDQT4DhNIrOno5YtQZfhdyoI+Y5Q== X-Received: by 10.84.228.215 with SMTP id y23mr2489273pli.358.1502902322354; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:52:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.166.168 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:52:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Nick ODell Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:52:01 -0600 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?0JDQu9C10LrRgdC10Lkg0JzRg9GC0L7QstC60LjQvQ==?= , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e08e4f54f0e5f450556e1b72b" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:53:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Proposal of a new BIP : annual splitting blockchain database to reduce its size. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:52:02 -0000 --089e08e4f54f0e5f450556e1b72b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What makes this approach better than the prune option of Bitcoin? On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:20 AM, =D0=90=D0=BB=D0=B5=D0=BA=D1=81=D0=B5=D0= =B9 =D0=9C=D1=83=D1=82=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=BD 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 t= o > 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 > > --089e08e4f54f0e5f450556e1b72b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
What makes this approach better than the prune option of B= itcoin?

On W= ed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:20 AM, =D0=90=D0=BB=D0=B5=D0=BA=D1=81=D0=B5=D0=B9 = =D0=9C=D1=83=D1=82=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=BD via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Let me describe the possible= improvement of the bitcoin blockchain database (BBD)=C2=A0 size in general= terms.

We can implement new routine : annual split of the BBD= . Reason is that 140gb full wallet unconvinience.

BBD splits i= n two parts :
1) old blocks before the date of split and
2) new blo= cks, starting from first technical block with all rolled totals on the date= of split.
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 (also possible transfer of tiny totals du= e to their unprofitability to the miners, so we cut long tail of tiny holde= rs)
3) old blocks packs into annual megablocks and stores in the s= ide archive chain for some needs for FBI investigations or other goals.
=


Thanks for your a= ttention,

Alexey Mutovkin



<= br>








_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--089e08e4f54f0e5f450556e1b72b--