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
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <brianchoffman@gmail.com>) id 1WYI8r-00071J-1h
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:47:57 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.192.182 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.192.182; envelope-from=brianchoffman@gmail.com;
helo=mail-pd0-f182.google.com;
Received: from mail-pd0-f182.google.com ([209.85.192.182])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WYI8q-00031L-4q
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:47:57 +0000
Received: by mail-pd0-f182.google.com with SMTP id y10so4114332pdj.27
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.137.136 with SMTP id qi8mr21021233pbb.79.1397148470286;
Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.89.237 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP1rPZYkTLmx5GOdj67oQAgFjeaF-LCKAXpg5XsEhXYFuQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP04O7EqB=TqyTiC7O1K2A9R0nKJ_ssANHKg=Byum8-LtA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJDbYjwhpsV15a+7kCO_vTstEewVrwvqbnB=a5zOSwFC6Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgStmEpiUV4Yh-qqu6sZ+VZ5SiQPwp+QA=3X5zR52ia3OA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJBxEC2MifJQY5-vn2zSOHo-UOm8B1vYHHOfuxq26=VscQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAADm4BDDJkS_xdjUn=2Yzs4B0RXTvpzpd5Z_kDRorzrn1HWSng@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP1rPZYkTLmx5GOdj67oQAgFjeaF-LCKAXpg5XsEhXYFuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:47:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CAADm4BB8y=k_f7CG3tyX6ruWF0w3+hU2Szv7ajLp1x7KhS56GA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Hoffman <brianchoffman@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e43e645208104f6b2fa08
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [209.85.192.182 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-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
(brianchoffman[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-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
X-Headers-End: 1WYI8q-00031L-4q
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Chain pruning
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, 10 Apr 2014 16:47:57 -0000
--047d7b2e43e645208104f6b2fa08
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Looks like only about ~30% disk space savings so I see your point. Is there
a critical reason why blocks couldn't be formed into "superblocks" that are
chained together and nodes could serve a specific superblock, which could
be pieced together from different nodes to get the full blockchain? This
would allow participants with limited resources to serve full portions of
the blockchain rather than limited pieces of the entire blockchain.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> Suggestions always welcome!
>
> The main problem with this is that the block chain is mostly random bytes
> (hashes, keys) so it doesn't compress that well. It compresses a bit, but
> not enough to change the fundamental physics.
>
> However, that does not mean the entire chain has to be stored on expensive
> rotating platters. I've suggested that in some star trek future where the
> chain really is gigantic, it could be stored on tape and spooled off at
> high speed. Literally a direct DMA from tape drive to NIC. But we're not
> there yet :)
>
--047d7b2e43e645208104f6b2fa08
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Looks like only about ~30% disk space savings so I see you=
r point. Is there a critical reason why blocks couldn't be formed into =
"superblocks" that are chained together and nodes could serve a s=
pecific superblock, which could be pieced together from different nodes to =
get the full blockchain? This would allow participants with limited resourc=
es to serve full portions of the blockchain rather than limited pieces of t=
he entire blockchain.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 1=
0, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:mik=
e@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px =
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir=3D"ltr">Suggestions always welcome!<div><br></div><div>The main pr=
oblem with this is that the block chain is mostly random bytes (hashes, key=
s) so it doesn't compress that well. It compresses a bit, but not enoug=
h to change the fundamental physics.</div>
<div><br></div><div>However, that does not mean the entire chain has to be =
stored on expensive rotating platters. I've suggested that in some star=
trek future where the chain really is gigantic, it could be stored on tape=
and spooled off at high speed. Literally a direct DMA from tape drive to N=
IC. But we're not there yet :)</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--047d7b2e43e645208104f6b2fa08--
|
