[Bitcoin-development] Why are we bleeding nodes?

Tamas Blummer tamas at bitsofproof.com
Mon Apr 7 19:05:48 UTC 2014

Maybe it is not a question of the maturity of the implementation but that of the person making presumptions of it.

I consider a fully pruned blockchain being equivalent to the UTXO. Block that hold no
more unspent transaction are reduced to a header. There is however no harm if more retained.

Tamas Blummer

On 07.04.2014, at 21:02, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas at bitsofproof.com> wrote:
>> Once a single transaction in pruned in a block, the block is no longer
>> eligible to be served to other nodes.
>> Which transactions are pruned can be rather custom e.g. even depending on
>> the wallet(s) of the node,
>> therefore I guess it is more handy to return some bitmap of pruned/full
>> blocks than ranges.
> This isn't at all how pruning works in Bitcoin-QT  (nor is it how I
> expect pruning to work for any mature implementation). Pruning can
> work happily on a whole block at a time basis regardless if all the
> transactions in it are spent or not.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140407/5d49d687/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140407/5d49d687/attachment.sig>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list