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
|
Return-Path: <ogunden@phauna.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE9F5BE9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Jul 2015 14:52:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from peacecow.phauna.org (phauna.org [208.82.98.102])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79DF0221
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Jul 2015 14:52:37 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=phauna.org;
s=apricot;
h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID;
bh=BTJnp5fF8Wzdr/VjTHX+bbugicNdMuItccqRQA/eKjE=;
b=WKGPl1oAht+lSIuzt7UA4+BFLsYnVVyKtH8OxxplqD72UIVLRRopBkBOeURF9izkHZT943KLBTABvbUKk6A2mEPHh0mmXMqRAoxsU1s1Bs2LhfUWUPara+WyfxDrWyZC3gOlhb6ek5YDuJlXWM7w/VQoXd/kjiMl8IGm8/CePp0=;
Received: from [208.167.254.89] (helo=[10.166.1.6])
by peacecow.phauna.org with esmtpsa
(TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <ogunden@phauna.org>) id 1ZAfqt-0007gT-Ij
for bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org;
Thu, 02 Jul 2015 09:52:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5595503D.2010608@phauna.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:52:45 -0400
From: Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <F6C7E867-1CCA-4DFB-8A88-361316A76FC3@me.com>
<CABssiCq5JZdkQNmZ1x8OhNYqVxQOPXWe0Ui7wL7dCK9yQe9AoQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABssiCq5JZdkQNmZ1x8OhNYqVxQOPXWe0Ui7wL7dCK9yQe9AoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam_score: -2.9
X-Spam_score_int: -28
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "peacecow.phauna.org", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: I'm also a user who runs a full node, and I also like this
idea. I think Gavin has done some back-of-the-envelope calculations around
this stuff, but nothing so clearly defined as what you propose. On 07/02/2015
08:33 AM, Mistr Bigs wrote: > I'm an end user running a full node on an aging
laptop. > I think this is a great suggestion! I'd love to know what system
> requirements are needed for running Bitcoin Core. > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015
at 6:04 AM, Jean-Paul Kogelman > <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com <mailto:jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>>
wrote: > > I’m a game developer. I write time critical code for a living
and > have to deal with memory, CPU, GPU and I/O budgets on a daily basis.
> These budgets are based on what we call a minimum specification (of > hardware);
min spec for short. In most cases the min spec is based > on entry model
machines that are available during launch, and will > give the user an enjoyable
experience when playing our games. > Obviously, we can turn on a number of
bells and whistles for people > with faster machines, but that’s not the
point of this mail. > > The point is, can we define a min spec for Bitcoin
Core? The number > one reason for this is: if you know how your changes affect
your > available budgets, then the risk of breaking something due to > capacity
problems is reduced to practically zero. > > > > > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> [...]
Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Defining a min spec
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, 02 Jul 2015 14:52:38 -0000
I'm also a user who runs a full node, and I also like this idea. I think
Gavin has done some back-of-the-envelope calculations around this stuff,
but nothing so clearly defined as what you propose.
On 07/02/2015 08:33 AM, Mistr Bigs wrote:
> I'm an end user running a full node on an aging laptop.
> I think this is a great suggestion! I'd love to know what system
> requirements are needed for running Bitcoin Core.
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Jean-Paul Kogelman
> <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com <mailto:jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>> wrote:
>
> I’m a game developer. I write time critical code for a living and
> have to deal with memory, CPU, GPU and I/O budgets on a daily basis.
> These budgets are based on what we call a minimum specification (of
> hardware); min spec for short. In most cases the min spec is based
> on entry model machines that are available during launch, and will
> give the user an enjoyable experience when playing our games.
> Obviously, we can turn on a number of bells and whistles for people
> with faster machines, but that’s not the point of this mail.
>
> The point is, can we define a min spec for Bitcoin Core? The number
> one reason for this is: if you know how your changes affect your
> available budgets, then the risk of breaking something due to
> capacity problems is reduced to practically zero.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
|
