📅 Original date posted:2018-05-10
📝 Original message:That is a good observation that most of the historical data does not need
to be kept around. I believe what you are suggested is already implemented,
however. Bitcoin Core can operate in a pruned mode, where the bulk of the
historical block data is discarded and only the current UTXO set (and a few
recent blocks) are kept. As you note, some nodes on the network need to run
in archive mode to help new nodes get in sync. BIP 159 helps identify these
archive nodes at the gossip layer.
In the case of lightning, some implementations made use of the additional
txindex, which is not compatible with pruned mode.
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Segue via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On 3/17/18, someone posted on the Lightning-dev list, "Can I try Lightning
> without running a fully-fledged bitcoin block chain? (Yubin Ruan)." The
> inquirer was asking because he didn't have much space to store the entire
> blockchain on his laptop.
>
> I replied:
>
> "Developers,
>
> On THIS note and slightly off-topic but relevant, why can't chunks of
> blockchain peel off the backend periodically and be archived, say on
> minimum of 150 computers across 7 continents?
>
> It seems crazy to continue adding on to an increasingly long chain to
> infinity if the old chapters (i.e. more than, say, 2 years old) could be
> stored in an evenly distributed manner across the planet. The same 150
> computers would not need to store every chapter either, just the index
> would need to be widely distributed in order to reconnect with a chapter if
> needed. Then maybe it is no longer a limitation in the future for people
> like Yubin. "
>
> It was suggested by a couple of lightning developers that I post this idea
> on the bitcoin-dev list. So, here I post :).
>
> Segue
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20180509/4a7cccc7/attachment-0001.html>;
Jim Posen [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nc…lqt2n
2023-06-07 18:12:02
in reply to nevent1q…s3jj
Author Public Key
npub1ncnj8arudstdxzfhxk7k4nwgkrw3hyw8sgt0wqqmm5hh2c4knmgs2lqt2nPublished at
2023-06-07 18:12:02Event JSON
{
"id": "c4859d75cb38199b2dc9c419cc5a70412b91f5de30db6669df9098bb2c85391e",
"pubkey": "9e2723f47c6c16d3093735bd6acdc8b0dd1b91c78216f7001bdd2f7562b69ed1",
"created_at": 1686161522,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"7945b7752382d15ac62314de3e725736f326e0fa7eb2cd64923741237383cf03",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5a3ff6aceeffa1f950be07b7a3440de1ce33f9411858b1bbae5321d2c1338c00",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4505072744a9d3e490af9262bfe38e6ee5338a77177b565b6b37730b63a7b861"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2018-05-10\n📝 Original message:That is a good observation that most of the historical data does not need\nto be kept around. I believe what you are suggested is already implemented,\nhowever. Bitcoin Core can operate in a pruned mode, where the bulk of the\nhistorical block data is discarded and only the current UTXO set (and a few\nrecent blocks) are kept. As you note, some nodes on the network need to run\nin archive mode to help new nodes get in sync. BIP 159 helps identify these\narchive nodes at the gossip layer.\n\nIn the case of lightning, some implementations made use of the additional\ntxindex, which is not compatible with pruned mode.\n\nOn Wed, May 9, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Segue via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On 3/17/18, someone posted on the Lightning-dev list, \"Can I try Lightning\n\u003e without running a fully-fledged bitcoin block chain? (Yubin Ruan).\" The\n\u003e inquirer was asking because he didn't have much space to store the entire\n\u003e blockchain on his laptop.\n\u003e\n\u003e I replied:\n\u003e\n\u003e \"Developers,\n\u003e\n\u003e On THIS note and slightly off-topic but relevant, why can't chunks of\n\u003e blockchain peel off the backend periodically and be archived, say on\n\u003e minimum of 150 computers across 7 continents?\n\u003e\n\u003e It seems crazy to continue adding on to an increasingly long chain to\n\u003e infinity if the old chapters (i.e. more than, say, 2 years old) could be\n\u003e stored in an evenly distributed manner across the planet. The same 150\n\u003e computers would not need to store every chapter either, just the index\n\u003e would need to be widely distributed in order to reconnect with a chapter if\n\u003e needed. Then maybe it is no longer a limitation in the future for people\n\u003e like Yubin. \"\n\u003e\n\u003e It was suggested by a couple of lightning developers that I post this idea\n\u003e on the bitcoin-dev list. So, here I post :).\n\u003e\n\u003e Segue\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20180509/4a7cccc7/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "c9193368a9a5bfda2e67124cdaf091b440334c3faf8e48ab4e0bfe75d4516474cebfcd13d6799162421f19d2536ccd70d2855b1be92bbb68af134abb4c38f2ad"
}