Topic: Full Bitcoin Node Costs - page 2. (Read 628 times)

I think mentioning Internet is a kind of superfluous since everyone has it anyway, but I haven't seen anyone mention electricity. On older and less power efficient hardware, and with higher rates, over the year it can exceed the value of a cheap computer.


I think you could be off by a couple years.

Yeah, I think I got about 700 GB sent already for about 2 weeks. So estimate maybe 1.4 TB per month. Maybe 1.5 TB. 90 connections. And I think I set mine to have larger memory or something. mempool is at around 160 mb.

For me, I've always been running a full node. Since 2012-ish. I don't know if I would still be running one if I had just recently "joined"... maybe I would have.

This is not true. Broadcasting a transaction from a full node that includes a low fee or is invalid will not guarantee the transaction will confirm. You could even include what was the “next block” fee, and the transaction might not confirm if fees rise before the next block and continue to be elevated until the transaction is dropped from most nodes mempools.

Running a full node will reduce but not remove the chances a valid transaction will be ignored when it is broadcast. 

This is really the selling point for running a full node. There are simply many people who don’t care about their privacy, or don’t put the value of the amount of increased privacy above the effort to run a full node.

Some users simply don't want to do it, that's all. We westerners can enjoy the benefits of unlimited internet bandwidth, but consider the African continent that still lags behind. They have limitations that don't allow them to download 350GB. And it's time consuming for the average user who just wants to make the occasional transactions from time to time. 

In the words of satoshi himself: Some users just want to be users.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6306

Oh right! You were saying in the context to Raspberry Pi, I missed that part. I thought we discussing about running Bitcoin Core in command-line.

Just curious, has anyone tried running an explorer on RPi?
Sure, pruned nodes are still nodes anyways. I've made my point about the time taken and I think you have made yours clear as well. No point discussing it further since my point was from the general view that I had when interacting with other Bitcoiners.

Same. Though I think most of the OEM computers that I've seen tops at about 1TB without upgrades, perhaps just catering to different market. Damn, I've never seen a 500GB drive that old though  .
Running a node is a piece of cake, my first full node was done using a bash script 4 years ago, whether people want to run it is a whole other issue altogether[1]. Running Bitcoin Core on your computer is also considered a full node.

[1] https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/historical.html

---

Anyways, I'll try to set up a full node on my RPi and see how long it takes to synchronize. Maybe try to run a blockexplorer as well, while I'm at it. Will update this thread soon.

Case in point guys: if your desktop/laptop can run CS:GO (and it's system requirements are very low - most hardware [ram sticks, cpu, disk] from 2011 or later will work) then chances are it can run a full node like a champ. That's a few hundred dollars just to own a PC anyway which can also function as a node at the same time.

You probably shouldn't attempt to run Core on a disk that's already been running for 10 years anyway.


40GB a day outgoing is normal for a node with a fast internet speed and 80+ incoming peers. The lower your node's latency the more well-connected it will be which results in yours sending several hundred TX and block messages to all of those peers.

Using open source wallets like Sparrow for example you really don't need to use 3rd party explorers, or you can run your own explorer.

With that logic nobody would run full nodes, and please don't make this precious disk space argument anymore.  
I would not waste any time, computer would do all downloading and work for me and I would do other things meanwhile.

Common man, we are 2021 and I have multiple hard drives with multiple TB of space and even my backup HDD drive old more than 20 years have 500 GB of space.

There are many open source one click solutions for running full node now, and I know most people still won't run it, but why putting off all people telling them how it's almost impossible and very hard to run full node for average users.
Examples of one-click full node solutions for lazy or non-tech users:
- myNode
- Samourai Dojo
- Umbrel

It's really just a function of the "instant gratification" society that we have devolved into... People want stuff "now"... they don't want to wait a couple of days. So the idea of having to download and verify 350+ Gigs of blockchain data just doesn't appeal to someone who wants to send $100 worth of BTC to somebody or to cash out their BTC from a gambling site or exchange etc.

Now, for some people, "Time is Money"™... so an argument could be made that the time "cost" of running a full node is quite high... especially given the volatility of BTC... $100 worth of BTC today, might only be $80 tomorrow (or it could be $150 ).

Sure, the IBD is really a "one off" cost... but it's still there... and if you're not going to be using the node on an ongoing basis, then it's pointless waiting 3 days to get a full node up and running. I'm sure if there was a way to setup a full node and have it fully synced and ready to go in less than 10 minutes... the number of full nodes currently in operation would probably increase by a fairly stubstantial amount

I would argue that CoinJoin and traditional mixers are different and the fees are never so clear cut, network fees still comes into play with Chipmixer both during the deposit and the withdrawal. They aim to obfuscate the path rather than to completely break the link and the trustless aspect of that is enticing for some, no risk of MITM attacks, etc. Of course using a full node will be marginally more secure, I don't think most people find it an issue though. Even if you're running a full node, you'll probably still be using a block explorer to search up on the transactions. Full nodes are limited in this aspect.

I have both unlimited and unmetered 1GBPS but it
No. There is no decent substitute for this, fiat, Litecoin, Ethereum are all intrinsically different. If your primary purpose is to use Bitcoin, to receive and send funds, why would you waste days trying to bootstrap the entire Blockchain when a simple Electrum download or Wasabi would be enough. I have to sacrifice my disk space and time just to set up a node, why would I do that when I can just use a SPV wallet in minutes?

I understand, I was talking about the motivation to move to altcoins; topic appears to be saying people may move to altcoin due to the TX fees, not solely because its not feasible to run a full node. It really depends on your definition of average. From what I can recall, most desktops that I have seen comes with a HDD of 1TB max. It's more than enough to store the entire blockchain on it, provided that you can stand looking at 360GB of block data occupying your HDD. Sure, you can upgrade but the whole process would probably appear to be daunting for most.

There are loads of clients that supports LN and there is no lacking of LN nodes. Adopting LN lies only on the fact that there are still a bulk of the merchants still not accepting LN at all. You don't have to use LN with custodial clients, Electrum isn't at least.

---

Yes, it is relatively cheap if that is the point you're making. If you're saying that people will run the nodes, I highly doubt that would be the case. I'm coming from the average user's POV, still see tons of people being put off by the bootstrapping on their own computer.

Yes, but Chipmixer would be even better, or monero with much lower fees that wasabi, and if you are not using full node you need to trust other people and explorers for showing your balance and transactions.
If you already have unlimited and unmetered internet like many people have, than I don't see any downside for running full node, and we don't always need to have financial benefit for doing that.
For example why are you using Bitcoin for transations?
Is there any financial benefit for sending transations in Bitcoin compared to USD or some altcoin?
I don't think so, but we do have other benefits.

Topic is about transaction fees, but he clearly writes that it is expensive to run Bitcoin nodes and I showed that it isn't so expensive.

Don't you think if more people would run full Bitcoin and LN node that more people would use LN and in that way save more on fees?
I really don't see the point of using LN with custodial clients.

I'm confused... Why do you need to use Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL)? The Windows versions of Bitcoin Core/bitcoind works perfectly fine as a "Full Node".




Thank goodness for unlimited fibre tho!!?!


That's less than 48 hours worth of uptime... and already at 88 gigs of data sent...

Indeed! For an average Windows/Mac user, terminal = geek thing. But with a little courage, it isn't that difficult. Especially, with the introduction of WSL, the life has become easier for Windows users. It took me around an hour with an online article to figure out how to setup WSL on my computer and how to download and run Bitcoin Core. Even without the deep understanding of Linux, I was able to run the commands (mostly through copy/paste) and successfully setup the full node. If people really wanna run the node, they don't have to install actual Linux OS or anything. Simple, WSL setup and downloading Ubuntu from Microsoft Store will do the task.

Wouldn't using a Wasabi Wallet be just sufficient and better than the privacy that Bitcoin Core can provide? I don't think being able to run a LN node would be that enticing. You would probably be looking to run Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of purely as a full node if your purpose is for the bolded part.
Right, so the topic is more about the fact that the fees for the transactions are rising rapidly and it is infeasible to use Bitcoin for day to day transaction.

When people are making decisions they'll generally evaluate whether something is worth doing or not. IBD on RPi takes several days of constant synchronization or at least that was from my experience. Waiting days just to run a Bitcoin node when the most I'll do with it is probably to point my SPV wallet at it is probably not that worth, considering that I've already spent ~$70 on it alone. So what is the point of running one when an SPV node will be more than sufficient? I have never found Bitcoin Core that useful if my primary purpose is to just send and receive coins, privacy and security isn't an issue.

If you want to accommodate even the current transaction volume, I guarantee that the storage and the bandwidth requirements will not be enough. Nevermind LN, it doesn't even have a comparable adoption rate in the first place. If people really want to run a full node, I doubt there would only be ~10K nodes with listening connection.

You are wrong :-)

On my own side I am running 2 lightning nodes, both on RPi4 units. For those I AM using SSD, but not for speed. Since they are USB they are powered through the USB port on the RPi and the pull less power then a spinning drive allowing me to have a screen and some other things attached without worrying about power.
Look at raspiblitz and mynodebtc

For others I have setup I have been using 4th gen core i5 PCs. Dell OptiPlex 3020 units. Just about indestructible.
8gb DDR3 ram so it's cheap to find
And 1TB spinning drives.

For the initial sync if you are pulling from the net then yes it's nice to be able to pull down the blockchain a bit faster, but after that not so much.

Now, if you are using this machine for something else (anything else) too it's a different conversation, but just running a local node you can talk to, it's more then fine.

-Dave

There is no need to run node on Pi4 if you already have some old computer, this can be even cheaper, and there are no financial benefits but you are 100% sure that your transactions will be confirmed (if you used correct fees) and you will have much more privacy for sure (if you care about that), plus you will be able to run your own LN node.
My point was not to show any benefits, but to use this topic whenever someone tells me that running Bitcoin nodes is expensive, and that we need to move to some altcoin because of that, like in THIS example.
I think this will also answer Hard Drive argument with links I provided.

bs

It isn't, such a setup is quite common. My node[1] is roughly about $10 a month and I have some spare capacity for my side projects. Something like this is usually dedicated for one purpose only so the argument is still valid that the average user doesn't find any benefits in taking the (fairly long) time to download just for a full node. I don't see how people would be motivated to do something like this if it doesn't benefit them directly. SPV clients are sufficient for most users and they probably wouldn't bother to even think about this.

RPis are actually fairly weak if you actually try them. I wouldn't do the IBD on it though.

[1] http://163.172.57.208/

---

Something that is related; for those who did this, is it reliable to use a USB SATA connection for this? I'm thinking of running another since I have a spare RPi4 but I'm not sure whether using an adapter would be okay,

I see many people are claiming that running full Bitcoin node is expensive and that many people can't afford it but I never saw exact calculations and costs.
Only with running full nodes we can say that Bitcoin is truly decentralized, and all transactions and blocks are fully validated.

Requirements for running full Bitcoin node

 - Desktop or Laptop computer or Raspberry Pi with minimum 2GB RAM (starting from $35)

 - Hard Drive (starting from $13 per TB)

 - Internet connection with good upload speed and unlimited traffic (starting from $5 per Month)

Hard Drives prices are rapidly going down and Seagate just announced they plan to release 50 TB hard drives by 2026 and over 120 TB HDDs after 2030 and you can see that hard drive prices are starting from $13 per TB.
Trend is clear and nobody can tell me that people can't afford to buy large hard drive today, much larger than current Bitcoin blockchain size of around 350GB.

Internet connection prices varies a lot depending from region you live but cheapest is in Ukraine, Russia, Romania and most expensive in Ethiopia according to Numbeo stats.
Internet connection speed is also going up all the time especially for Scandinavia and Asia.

I think most people can afford RaspberryPi4.

Is there someone who can still convince me I am wrong and come up with new theory that running full Bitcoin node is expensive and not for everyone?

---

Cryptocurrency Client Categorization (Full node, Pruned node, SPV node,...)