Author: Andrew Johnson 2017-03-29 16:41:29
Published on: 2017-03-29T16:41:29+00:00
The discussion started with increasing number of users in the system and the possibility of more new nodes appearing. However, there was a lack of empirical evidence to prove it. The load on archival nodes was also discussed, with the majority of the load coming from new nodes going after old blocks. This could potentially be an attack vector by constantly overwhelming archival nodes, making it difficult for new nodes to catch up in a reasonable amount of time. The suggestion was made to pay archival nodes a small amount of bitcoin to retrieve blocks older than a certain cutoff, with metadata included in the transaction. This could incentivize running archival nodes, but would not be very user-friendly. When asked about pruned nodes, it was mentioned that they are not the default configuration and increasing their usage would substantially burden archive nodes. Discussion about disk space requirements was deferred to another thread.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T22:52:14.336816+00:00