đź“… Original date posted:2021-03-01
đź“ť Original message:On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 10:18 AM Leo Wandersleb via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> > wrote:
> Only headers need to be downloaded sequentially so downloading relevant blocks from one node is totally possible with gaps in between.
In fact this is exactly how libbitcoin v4 works. We download and store blocks in parallel. In the case of a restart block gaps are repopulated. Given that headers are validated, we go after the most responsive nodes. Based on standard deviation, we drop the slowest peers and rebalance load to new/empty channels. We make ordered but not necessarily sequential requests. There is no distinction between “initial” block download, a restart, or a single or few blocks at the top. So it’s referred to as continuous parallel block download.
But we don’t prune. Personally I consider this counterproductive. Apart from the complexity, it’s not healthy. And the chain grows linearly with storage cost falling exponentially, leading to a straightforward conclusion.
e
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210301/568af3cd/attachment.html>;
eric at voskuil.org [ARCHIVE] /
npub1r3…6s8vu
2023-06-07 18:29:39
in reply to nevent1q…zspk
Author Public Key
npub1r34khxrz9w39zpzezymqz04dcel95adfxf6qpjul9wdv2qn5vtps06s8vuPublished at
2023-06-07 18:29:39Event JSON
{
"id": "ac2f592fd1bfb3a77aac49262d94c4f6f05d65e74ed4618c3adc5db50d8d0f4a",
"pubkey": "1c6b6b98622ba25104591136013eadc67e5a75a9327400cb9f2b9ac5027462c3",
"created_at": 1686162579,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d10f4fcf03fd27c60326979d0ee1ad55ef89ead7d2ab3dbef2171c629eed1636",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ffac27804b0c4488ee5a60581c8a4f81765341c0196a950c7382b4b42ca6d972",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"03111b3dcac4508bd5dcda221b0b2b4e419292ae403c6a77a615481933a12b2d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-03-01\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 10:18 AM Leo Wandersleb via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e \u003e wrote:\n\n \n\n\u003e Only headers need to be downloaded sequentially so downloading relevant blocks from one node is totally possible with gaps in between.\n\n \n\nIn fact this is exactly how libbitcoin v4 works. We download and store blocks in parallel. In the case of a restart block gaps are repopulated. Given that headers are validated, we go after the most responsive nodes. Based on standard deviation, we drop the slowest peers and rebalance load to new/empty channels. We make ordered but not necessarily sequential requests. There is no distinction between “initial” block download, a restart, or a single or few blocks at the top. So it’s referred to as continuous parallel block download.\n\n \n\nBut we don’t prune. Personally I consider this counterproductive. Apart from the complexity, it’s not healthy. And the chain grows linearly with storage cost falling exponentially, leading to a straightforward conclusion.\n\n \n\ne\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210301/568af3cd/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "6fab181fed155c4fe7228e40d896382f170e6ccdc3a970c5ffec6e62ac7a7321ee5313a1b9898c77a066d246f16f6a0d6b0c21bfaf7a20b8615aa545800cfcf7"
}