Topic: Once again, what about the scalability issue? (Read 11259 times)
Apparently, Satoshi predicted this and his reply was: "By the time BTC is mainstream, technology will be advanced enough for 1MB not being a problem".
Are there still plans for pruning? Is it technically possible in BTC?
Bitcoin blockchain size is 30 GB. I've heard that Bitcoin 0.10 got improved blockchain downloading. How many times is it faster now?
I had to download the entire blockchain again because as I updated from 9.3 or whatever the previous version was it got corrupted. It was much faster, much many connected peers and the connections happened quicker. Last time it took me like 2 days, this time I managed to do it in 6 hours or something along the lines.I just had to index the whole thing again, not download it, which took less than a day on my PC
I had a similar issue to manselr, I had 0.9.1 I believe. Did the install correctly, it launched, then there was some sort of error message and the only option pretty much to continue is download the entire blockchain from block 0.
Since I don't have an SSD Hard drive on my laptop, it took me like 12-14 hours total to redownload. Better than the 2-3 days typical time, but still a long time overall.
Bitcoin blockchain size is 30 GB. I've heard that Bitcoin 0.10 got improved blockchain downloading. How many times is it faster now?
I had to download the entire blockchain again because as I updated from 9.3 or whatever the previous version was it got corrupted. It was much faster, much many connected peers and the connections happened quicker. Last time it took me like 2 days, this time I managed to do it in 6 hours or something along the lines.I just had to index the whole thing again, not download it, which took less than a day on my PC
Looks like Gavin and the core devs will address scalability in June:
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/gavin-andresen-optimistic-about-scaling-bitcoin/30652
Fork away fellas!
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/gavin-andresen-optimistic-about-scaling-bitcoin/30652
Fork away fellas!
I had to download the entire blockchain again because as I updated from 9.3 or whatever the previous version was it got corrupted. It was much faster, much many connected peers and the connections happened quicker. Last time it took me like 2 days, this time I managed to do it in 6 hours or something along the lines.
So it's like 10x speed up, a good moment for 20 MiB blocks.
Bitcoin blockchain size is 30 GB. I've heard that Bitcoin 0.10 got improved blockchain downloading. How many times is it faster now?
I had to download the entire blockchain again because as I updated from 9.3 or whatever the previous version was it got corrupted. It was much faster, much many connected peers and the connections happened quicker. Last time it took me like 2 days, this time I managed to do it in 6 hours or something along the lines.
Bitcoin blockchain size is 30 GB. I've heard that Bitcoin 0.10 got improved blockchain downloading. How many times is it faster now?
Can't someone devise a system where costs aren't planned to escalate continuously into the future? One that is cheap today and always will be?...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaidSafe
I was jerking around, hands on cheeks damsel in distress style
I already knew of a platform where costs would not increase significantly as the network grows. 
Can't someone devise a system where costs aren't planned to escalate continuously into the future? One that is cheap today and always will be?...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaidSafe
Blockchain size has crossed 10000 MB mark. I think it's time to close this thread until we see 20000 MB...
Sorry for bad timing, I missed the moment when the blockchain was 20000 MB. It's larger than 22000 MB now, could anyone point me to a solution of the problem (if it's implemented)?
Can't someone devise a system where costs aren't planned to escalate continuously into the future? One that is cheap today and always will be?...
I don't pay $40 for internet and I'd prefer not to keep having to upgrade my computer every couple of years for no discernible benefit... I have had enough of that in Windoze...
I am a firm believer that bitcoin is facing three challenges. 1. blockchain bloat, 2. low transaction rate per second, and 3. a mining system growing into something it wasn't ever designed to be.
The OP has brought up a serious question. Blowing him off doesn't fix the problem. I would love to see Bitcoin succeed and would really like to see a definitive road map here of how bloat is going to be solved.
What I have read so far in responses is that
A) it is no big deal because as the blockchain grows, so will computers ability to handle it
B) there is a way to trim it but it hasn't been implemented
I don't know enough on the technical side to know if either of these are true, but I know they can't both be true.
One answer says there is no problem, the other says there is a problem but that the problem is not that big of a deal.
If the "A" scenerio is true, what happens if computers don't grow with the ability, what if the growth of Bitcoin explodes next year, what is plan B then?
If the "B" scenerio is true, why hasn't it been implemented yet, or at least some kind of alpha is in the works that can be built upon? It has been many years.
You got it wrong. There is a problem, but it is not a real problem(since computer power is far ahead), yet. So, plenty of time to fix it and they(Gavin) are currently working on it.The OP has brought up a serious question. Blowing him off doesn't fix the problem. I would love to see Bitcoin succeed and would really like to see a definitive road map here of how bloat is going to be solved.
What I have read so far in responses is that
A) it is no big deal because as the blockchain grows, so will computers ability to handle it
B) there is a way to trim it but it hasn't been implemented
I don't know enough on the technical side to know if either of these are true, but I know they can't both be true.
One answer says there is no problem, the other says there is a problem but that the problem is not that big of a deal.
If the "A" scenerio is true, what happens if computers don't grow with the ability, what if the growth of Bitcoin explodes next year, what is plan B then?
If the "B" scenerio is true, why hasn't it been implemented yet, or at least some kind of alpha is in the works that can be built upon? It has been many years.
Like I stated before, there is not even a forecast, when it will become a real problem, which just proofs we have plenty of time.
I am a firm believer that bitcoin is facing three challenges. 1. blockchain bloat, 2. low transaction rate per second, and 3. a mining system growing into something it wasn't ever designed to be.
The OP has brought up a serious question. Blowing him off doesn't fix the problem. I would love to see Bitcoin succeed and would really like to see a definitive road map here of how bloat is going to be solved.
What I have read so far in responses is that
A) it is no big deal because as the blockchain grows, so will computers ability to handle it
B) there is a way to trim it but it hasn't been implemented
I don't know enough on the technical side to know if either of these are true, but I know they can't both be true.
One answer says there is no problem, the other says there is a problem but that the problem is not that big of a deal.
If the "A" scenerio is true, what happens if computers don't grow with the ability, what if the growth of Bitcoin explodes next year, what is plan B then?
If the "B" scenerio is true, why hasn't it been implemented yet, or at least some kind of alpha is in the works that can be built upon? It has been many years.
The OP has brought up a serious question. Blowing him off doesn't fix the problem. I would love to see Bitcoin succeed and would really like to see a definitive road map here of how bloat is going to be solved.
What I have read so far in responses is that
A) it is no big deal because as the blockchain grows, so will computers ability to handle it
B) there is a way to trim it but it hasn't been implemented
I don't know enough on the technical side to know if either of these are true, but I know they can't both be true.
One answer says there is no problem, the other says there is a problem but that the problem is not that big of a deal.
If the "A" scenerio is true, what happens if computers don't grow with the ability, what if the growth of Bitcoin explodes next year, what is plan B then?
If the "B" scenerio is true, why hasn't it been implemented yet, or at least some kind of alpha is in the works that can be built upon? It has been many years.
What credibility of Wikipedia has to do with the discussion? It doesn't change the fact that the problem of bloated blockchain is well-known.
It is not an issue today as the blocks that are being mined are still well below the max block size of 1 MB. The solution is now much closer then it has been in the past as a hard fork is being proposed that would have the block size increase over time. Anyone who is "bloating" the blockchain with unnecessary spam is paying for the privilege of putting such spam on the blockchain (via TX fees) so people will have disincentives to do so, and when they do there is no real damage to the blockchain
What credibility of Wikipedia has to do with the discussion? It doesn't change the fact that the problem of bloated blockchain is well-known.
Wikipedia is not a credible source as anyone can make an edit to a wikipedia entry.
You are wrong. It's moderator by other users and you can't post anything you wish. You must provide references that will be checked by others.
EDIT: it is a good resource to find resources that are related to what you are trying to research but you should never use wikipedia as a credible source as it is not one
Wikipedia is not a credible source as anyone can make an edit to a wikipedia entry.
You are wrong. It's moderator by other users and you can't post anything you wish. You must provide references that will be checked by others.
A lot of people just write something themself and than put it on wikipedia, with them self as a reference
The problem of ever-growing blockchain is a common knowledge. I don't see a point to add anything to the description.
If you want a solution, the problem must be specific. You can't rely on common knowledge to propose a solution, because although it's common, it might be understood differently by each person. And then conflicts emerge.
Wikipedia is not a credible source as anyone can make an edit to a wikipedia entry.
You are wrong. It's moderator by other users and you can't post anything you wish. You must provide references that will be checked by others.
Fatty has a point. For now it is just a academical problem without even a forecast, when it will become a real problem.
Doesn't seem like it will become a real problem next year and they are already working on a solution.
Doesn't seem like it will become a real problem next year and they are already working on a solution.
Jump to: