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 ) id 1WYDIy-0005v0-BI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:38:04 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.45; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f45.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.219.45]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WYDIx-0007FR-Gp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:38:04 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id eb12so4284361oac.18 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:37:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.76.194 with SMTP id m2mr13634959oew.47.1397129878155; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.96.180 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:37:58 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jGoH4e6ViHoZPrtXTbHIjTqsYPY Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Pieter Wuille Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33cea617b68604f6aea6a1 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: 1WYDIx-0007FR-Gp Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Chain pruning 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: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:38:04 -0000 --047d7b33cea617b68604f6aea6a1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Chain pruning is probably a separate thread, changing subject. > Reason is that the actual blocks available are likely to change frequently > (if > you keep the last week of blocks I doubt anyone would specify blocks to keep in terms of time. More likely it'd be in terms of megabytes, as that's the actual resource constraint on nodes. Given a block size average it's easy to go from megabytes to num_blocks, so I had imagined it'd be a new addr field that specifies how many blocks from the chain head are stored. Then you'd connect to some nodes and if they indicate their chain head - num_blocks_stored is higher than your current chain height, you'd do a getaddr and go looking for nodes that are storing far enough back. --047d7b33cea617b68604f6aea6a1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chain pruning is probably a separate thread, changing subject.
= =C2=A0
Reason is=C2=A0that the actual blocks available are likely to change freque= ntly (if
you keep the last week of blocks

I doubt an= yone would specify blocks to keep in terms of time. More likely it'd be= in terms of megabytes, as that's the actual resource constraint on nod= es. Given a block size average it's easy to go from megabytes to num_bl= ocks, so I had imagined it'd be a new addr field that specifies how man= y blocks from the chain head are stored. Then you'd connect to some nod= es and if they indicate their chain head - num_blocks_stored is higher than= your current chain height, you'd do a getaddr and go looking for nodes= that are storing far enough back.


--047d7b33cea617b68604f6aea6a1--