Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
That'd be 7 bytes of nonce in the block header, which is 72,057,594,037,927,936 ~ 72 petahashes = 72,000 terahashes So: the changes for version 2 blocks would be has height in the coinbase, and has a 1-byte version number with a 3-byte extranonce. I don't understand why more nonce bits

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
My point is that stuffing nonces into whatever spaces we can find to eke out a bit more scalability in pools seems like a very short term fix with potentially very long term consequences. Although it may sound harsh, if your pool is struggling to keep up with calculating merkle roots (which is

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread Michael Grønager
Hi Steve, 45-90 minutes - note that its numbers from March/April, so a bit longer today, but far, far away from the 12 hours. I am using libcoin and the bitcoind build based on this. Libcoin is based on the Satoshi client, but refactured to use an async concurrency model. I also did a minor

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Peter Vessenes
I think it would be great to have more nonce space with less merkle calculation; keeping track of all possible versions of a block already takes real RAM, real computation. Being able to change one bit in the header and send out a new block for checking would ease our pool server work by a real

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
The Satoshi client uses a pure reentrant mutexes model As you presumably already know, the reference client doesn't attempt to parallelise most operations at all. Chain download is entirely single threaded. -- Live

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread steve
Hi Michael, from what I have noticed, bitcoin blockchain download/verfication all happens in 1 thread. (so multicores doesnt really help) That said, I have never tried on an ssd. What I do have is 6 SATA 6gbs configed as RAID0 Drives. 32gb of ram. ubuntu 64 (yeah I know), this runs upto 16