1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1SuceW-0006kq-8x
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 04:59:52 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.161.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.161.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-gg0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-gg0-f175.google.com ([209.85.161.175])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1SuceV-00040c-IG
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 04:59:52 +0000
Received: by ggnp4 with SMTP id p4so2837170ggn.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.79.8 with SMTP id f8mr2499760pax.81.1343365185618; Thu, 26
Jul 2012 21:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.59.6 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti28snGOZn9mCSALZ341TNCex23zxKHCKYztnMK3cF=jaTQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD2Ti29dqCYoOMcX0zcOQnpLGCxnCjYHHqMzyyq+hvcVQ2c7nQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgTHrWdXHbX8oiLgnrhdC+yxL4QyPd7S4iB8RMNip_sUGg@mail.gmail.com>
<A428177D-62AD-4712-9053-47B7ED5DBC84@mac.com>
<CAD2Ti2-3sR_qusfmiStb8pzaxaB8DsPaK8a2+LWm_uL+DwvzeA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgREzk_dU0ie+YvDdRwKcTk6tk_i=a2Bb74w9uF=EwYhGA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti2_Pz9-SsHP49+6MKnM0er9zdAaFKDQaOgqDpju1_igd_g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti28snGOZn9mCSALZ341TNCex23zxKHCKYztnMK3cF=jaTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 00:59:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQmQ6f1_025QgJsG4aEyH4yHwk-2aWUUY+2FPs7-Tpvvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-)
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
(gmaxwell[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
0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1SuceV-00040c-IG
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
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 04:59:52 -0000
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 12:20 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Update: this class of machine just became useless for bitcoin.
> When blk0002.dat was created to store more blocks, all forward
> progress processing blocks turned into losing ground by 20 or so
> a day. Guessing both datfiles were being accessed at once resulting
> in disk based overload. I've not seen any other mentions of crypto
> in this thread so I'm not sure how well new hardware would perform.
> Going shopping I guess.
I now have an 1.8 ghz p3 celeron (128k cache) which should be
substantially slower than your machine, running vintage 2.6.20 linux.
Unfortunately I forgot to turn on timestamp logging so I don't know
how long it took to sync the chain, but it was less than two days as
that was the span between when I checked on it. It's staying current
just fine.
Again, I encourage you to investigate your software configuration.
|
