Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SueTA-0001vd-Ma for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:56:16 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.160.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-pb0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-pb0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1SueT7-0007w6-0o for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:56:16 +0000 Received: by pbbrq2 with SMTP id rq2so4272866pbb.34 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:56:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.134.161 with SMTP id pl1mr11615716pbb.29.1343372166806; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:56:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.59.6 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:56:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:56:06 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: grarpamp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 1SueT7-0007w6-0o 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: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:56:16 -0000 On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 1:59 AM, grarpamp wrote: >> 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 > > Well, are you running bitcoin on, say, an FS with sha256 integrity > trees for all bits and AES-128-XTS/CBC disk encryption? > If not, we're not comparing the same apples, let alone the same OS. The file system is using twofish-cbc-essiv:sha256, apparently. (I went and dug up a mothballed machine of mine because of your post). And I agree, encrypting everything is a good practice=E2=80=94 I once got a disk back from RMA where only the first sectors were zeroed and the rest had someone elses data, since then I've encrypted everything because you can't wipe a dead drive. I'd love to know precisely what Bitcoin is doing thats making your machine so unhappy... but your configuration is uncommon for bitcoin nodes in many distinct ways so it's not clear where to start.