Topic: Block chain size/storage and slow downloads for new users - page 13. (Read 228658 times)

yes ... but, it's the final deal.
pool and miner must have a strong source for the block verification.

so, if you have strong miner, you always have strong complete source of blockchain at the end.

thanks for update

If I use Multibit, I assume I am  not contributing to the bitcoin network by allowing others to connect to me and download new blocks from each other. Wouldn't this become an issue if the majority of the users started to use an SPV client?

If you don't need the full functions, consider getting a light weight Bitcoin client. Full node requires CPU to verify blocks and memory space. They can be reduced by using a lightweight wallet as you do not need that much hard disk space because you do not need to download blocks. This is also the fastest.

It took me 23 hours to add fully functional bt-core on my MAC. Downloaded bootstrap.dat and synchronised with network. Macbook is new, but process was so slow.

"Deleting" old blocks is required, it should be easy to implement. Only require to clients remember up to 4 levels of transaction tree history. Now its like 300 000 levels of transaction tree required no idea why.
It would be great for bitcoin adoption

And after the download of the bootstrap.dat ... the bitcoin core job to extract all to recreate the block folder (in blockchain folder).

Too angry for me ... i choose the torrent source file instead  

https://bitcoin.org/bin/blockchain/ (and click on the .TORRENT file = 21Gb)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bitcoin-blockchain-data-torrent-145386

Left it running overnight, still not finished.
I must add that this is a fresh install.

Need to restart 2 times (stuck with no downloads of blocks) ... need to decrease connexion to 2 (if you have more ORPHAN BLOCKS writed on debuglog file).



I use "bartail" to view a dynamic updated debuglog in real time.
http://geekswithblogs.net/robz/archive/2008/05/09/baretail---log-file-monitoring-tool.aspx

OK Understand ... decrease MAXCONNEXION to 3 ... and blockchain flow correctly.
if you don't do this ... you always have ORPHAN block (more than 751 in memory) ... and synchro. don't work (i wait since 2 days with a freshly 0.9.3 installed).

please, correct this !  

How many can i write on this setting ?

-maxorphanblocks=

Because, my new Bitcoin 0.9.3 is stuck on 751 orphan blocks ... (1 years and 10 week to wait ... since 24h ... and i have restart bitcoin core many time to avoid orphan download).

I understand, now, why people don't use the "nodes" feature of bitcoin core ... if orphan are not erased from bitcoin blockchain.

it's a new pollution for noobs ... ? Generate orphan block to kill nodes job ... ?

thank you for informations.... very well explained

Thanks for this Mike. Even though I have been using the BitCoin-QT client for a few months now, I was always wondering how long it would take to download and why all of the blocks were useful.

There is a huge difference between blockchain.info wallet and any other wallets. Some of the online wallet service are shared wallet which means you do not control the private key. You can request blockchain.info to send you a copy of your wallet and you could also export the private key. On blockchain.info, the person controlling the private key is only you, they have no access of the private key. You can enable two factor authentication for a better security however.

If blockchain.info got hacked or shut down without warning one should still not lose their bitcoins as long as they've followed the fairly simple procedures to keep a hold of their private keys.  Nor can the attacker necessarily get the user's bitcoins because (in theory) blockchain.info themselves do NOT have the private key.

What an attacker, or a corrupt management, could do would be to start sending out a bogus javascript which would steal one's password and thus make it so that blockchain info could access the private keys.  As I said earlier, I would hope that this form of failure would effect relatively few people before it was detected.

The most legitimate problem with blockchain.info is, in my opinion, that the javascript interpreter which is normally part of the user's browser could be exploited.  Or other exploits of the host platform could present problems.  Naturally this could impact things besides web-wallets of course though.

It is worth note that historically most 'web wallets' did NOT follow the model pioneered by blockchain.info.  And of course as we know an amazing number of such 'services' ended up stealing the user's Bitcoins.  Surprise, surprise.  I would not consider a web wallet that did not meet or exceed blockchain.info's standards.

Yes. That's right! But is blockchain.info really secure? It is web wallet, so it might get hacked any time. IMO it is better to use Mutlibit HD which is a little better than Multibit. Remember, it is in Beta stage, so if you want a stable one, you can use Multibit. If you can't install Java, you can use Electrum.


Now there is no option to make it. If you can't download whole blocks, then use other wallets like Multibit, Electrum or any web wallet(not recommended) such as Blockchain.info, Coinbase, Hive etc...

  ~~MZ~~

Both solutions leave your secret key under your control.  In theory.  I use blockchain.info because last I looked Multibit required a Java install which is not available for my secure platform and which I don't even feel comfortable installing on my non-secure Windows machine.  To much bloat, opacity, and weirdness with that framework for my tastes.  I'm not a frequent Bitcoin user and hope that if blockchain.info's JS infrastructure is compromised, someone would note it in code before I got screwed.  I don't think I've done a transaction since the selling opportunity early in the year, though, and have not kept up on things lately.

is there a way to make bitcoin blocks minimum?

I really don't know what to do . I like Bitcoin core .. but that blockchain size downloading takes for ever    so should I go with blockchain.info or take Multibit ? what's the safest ? thanks