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
|
Return-Path: <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2468475
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:28:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net
[96.114.154.164])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0E6F226
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:28:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from resomta-po-18v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.242])
by resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id vtQZ1q0035E3ZMc01tUFt2; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:28:15 +0000
Received: from crushinator.localnet
([IPv6:2601:186:c000:825e:e9f4:8901:87c7:24a0])
by resomta-po-18v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id vtUC1q00Z4eLRLv01tUEhD; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:28:15 +0000
From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: Slurms MacKenzie <slurms@gmx.us>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:28:12 -0400
Message-ID: <1690410.cgD4NDVhNv@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.0.5-gentoo; KDE/4.14.10; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <trinity-c358bbcc-a5d1-487f-9aae-730241fc4eac-1437666965282@3capp-mailcom-bs12>
References: <trinity-c358bbcc-a5d1-487f-9aae-730241fc4eac-1437666965282@3capp-mailcom-bs12>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net;
s=q20140121; t=1437672495;
bh=aS2BgKvtmiJfx8K/Olcmb3gatmJou2qiwXzwmc4vSp0=;
h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:
Content-Type;
b=SqOuLvQ4jEXaggVkIwxgu9yUy2hODw1DYQEo6Pp9mfnkTRqGDUec6r6Crx++4viu5
WvO2YcwqWicC0d6CrriLP5hvzDx+7Dv3iH4LfpA2zDmgSWCnVrCewusb6bXrWFEp8c
gopg03iRV003p0ffF+xiz2bdfC4D3glUU3Usb8pLNBgaxnSFAL08TK2D4kIO/rADok
NfQFYRC9jdWdHCHrduQ8ZTpTJLMVDWTmXoEyEJBmgsXlrFzolWQFcpA6+9jxHuvzHv
I8IQloXgp9zE3EWCk5ypHa6bM3CZgN6MLTz25swjI5WsWhHy4oPd0CHSj5Gjby+BWm
3A+SmCLpCDK1A==
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Electrum Server Speed Test
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:28:17 -0000
Great data points, but isn't this an argument for improving Electrum Server's database performance, not for holding Bitcoin back?
(Nice alias, by the way. Whimmy wham wham wozzle!)
On Thursday, 23 July 2015, at 5:56 pm, Slurms MacKenzie via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Similar to the Bitcoin Node Speed Test, this is a quick quantitative look at how the Electrum server software handles under load. The Electrum wallet is extremely popular, and the distributed servers which power it are all hosted by volunteers without budget. The server requires a fully indexed Bitcoin Core daemon running, and produces sizable external index in order to allow SPV clients to quickly retrieve their history.
>
> 3.9G electrum/utxo
> 67M electrum/undo
> 19G electrum/hist
> 1.4G electrum/addr
> 24G electrum/
>
> Based on my own logs produced by the electrum-server console, it takes this server (Xeon, lots of memory, 7200 RPM RAID) approximately 3.7 minutes per megabyte of block to process into the index. This seems to hold true through the 10 or so blocks I have in my scroll buffer, the contents of blocks seem to be of approximately the same processing load. Continuing this trend with the current inter-block time of 9.8 minutes, an electrum-server instance running on modest-high end dedicated server is able to support up to 2.64 MB block sizes before permanently falling behind the chain.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
