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
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
|
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 <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UzjQs-0003d0-Bs
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 18 Jul 2013 08:19:26 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.177 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.177; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f177.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com ([209.85.214.177])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UzjQr-0001zJ-JB
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 18 Jul 2013 08:19:26 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id ta17so3406193obb.36
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.110.226 with SMTP id id2mr6465601obb.95.1374135560210;
Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <EFFD62F8-8066-4B56-8331-1F1A8D7FF3C2@mac.com>
References: <CANEZrP0_H9+prDSF92q8a4QzP=fzDM6cTDv0+KcfV9NF9thkmw@mail.gmail.com>
<3E7894A0-06F3-453D-87F8-975A244EBACF@include7.ch>
<CANEZrP2jmWkDbpJEm0vd2CKF-prFNbz_ZeNJfDWtSCKb8k5ZXA@mail.gmail.com>
<2BDA0943-22BB-4405-9AF0-86FB41FD04A6@include7.ch>
<CANEZrP0McSrVzwv=-qimPyX41EEDmyQdYW5QjPr_i+KWyJZSZw@mail.gmail.com>
<2F20A509-13A9-4C84-86D7-A15C21BACD53@include7.ch>
<CANEZrP2yQvmvwP_ZULdS2i+X6L9MeZ+DfidiuZPD2EHwLsN2MA@mail.gmail.com>
<2A1C412D-414E-4C41-8E20-F0D21F801328@grabhive.com>
<CANEZrP12V_5Ak0f91RsMziuqXysde102rGeSko=qPBjefy3AeA@mail.gmail.com>
<8EE501AA-1601-4C28-A32E-80F17D219D3A@grabhive.com>
<20130717105853.GA10083@savin>
<3DB67FAF-E113-47FE-9043-C22D0F5A4F4A@grabhive.com>
<16E9C860-51CA-4274-B852-A816D12B6A5B@mac.com>
<7685FDAE-C584-4FC8-9751-4D5556EC57C7@grabhive.com>
<CANEZrP3F0Q_NXhhbkh=9CESAAmhntM_uKQEe0CJf=sDuJx2Xmw@mail.gmail.com>
<EFFD62F8-8066-4B56-8331-1F1A8D7FF3C2@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:19:20 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: WicS9bv-URP3t1Mxr3v35CtKX2A
Message-ID: <CANEZrP2dLJXfRmG8PRiHMWNGsSwT2ZL0Ac3ib4YZQ1Hv7uZDVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Michael Gronager <gronager@mac.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0112ce20f0952e04e1c4ddda
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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: 1UzjQr-0001zJ-JB
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] SPV bitcoind? (was: Introducing
BitcoinKit.framework)
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: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 08:19:26 -0000
--089e0112ce20f0952e04e1c4ddda
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> The 90 minutes is not - the blockchain has grown quite a lot since last
> year, and as for the 3.5 speed, I havn't tested it since Pieter's
> ultraprune - libcoin also has something similar to ultraprune, done
> directly in the sqlite database backend, but I should run a head to head
> again - could be fun. I would assume, though, that the result would be
> similar timings.
>
ultraprune made a huge difference. I think it's very likely that this claim
is no longer true. Bitcoin got a lot more optimised since you first did
libcoin.
--089e0112ce20f0952e04e1c4ddda
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">The 90 minutes is not - the blockchain has g=
rown quite a lot since last year, and as for the 3.5 speed, I havn't te=
sted it since Pieter's ultraprune - libcoin also has something similar =
to ultraprune, done directly in the sqlite database backend, but I should r=
un a head to head again - could be fun. I would assume, though, that the re=
sult would be similar timings.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>ultraprune made a huge difference. I think=
it's very likely that this claim is no longer true. Bitcoin got a lot =
more optimised since you first did libcoin.</div></div></div></div>
--089e0112ce20f0952e04e1c4ddda--
|
