Bitcoin Forum

is it better to run through Linux vs Windows or Apple ? w the goal to run through TOR   

are these the correct specs ?   125 GB free disk space, 2 GB memory (RAM), unmetered or hi upload connection..  Please speak to me like im an idiot.  Dont assume I know anything.  many thanks for the help.  im super excited. refuse to worry about this proposed STABLE Act.  We all know this a war.  Im heading to bestbuy now to get the hardware.  Any advice or help is much appreciated.   Many Thanks

Sam
sjbergo@gmail.com

What is your purpose of running a full node? For your personal transactions or to help the network?

Running a pruned node allows you to save the storage space while still preserving the same level of security that you'll enjoy from a node that synchronizes fully.

125GB is far from enough for you to synchronize the blockchain fully and you'll have to prune it. The downside of that is that you can't swap the wallet files out as and when you like. You'll have to resynchronize the entire blockchain if you want to do so. Pruned nodes are perceived to be less useful than actual full nodes due to the fact that it can only serve a limited amount of information. You'll want to get a disk of at least 1TB if you want to run a node without pruning. Pruning will discard the unnecessary files that you won't need if you don't care about the things mentioned.

As for the OS, I don't find much of a difference between them. If you want to focus on privacy, Linux is the way to go. If you want better value, you shouldn't choose Apple. IMO, it's up to your personal preference and what you'd like to get.

Strike Windows, Apple and other non-free (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software) Operating Systems off your list.

Especially since you're willing to run the full node through Tor, moving from Windows or Apple to Linux is an awesome move towards privacy. From all the distros I've tried, I'd personally go for Debian. Feels great, looks nice and I consider it to be quite newbie-friendly. I consider that using Tor makes no sense if you're using an Operating System filled up with bloatware and spying stuff. You either move to the more privacy-oriented zone or you don't at all (personal opinion tho).

As @ranochigo said above, the rest depends on what your purpose of running a full node is. I'm way more paranoid about security and surveillance than the average Joe, so this is what I would do if I were you: I'd get a cheap PC (I'd personally get at least 4GB RAM tho) with sufficient disk space (at least 500GB) to run a full (non-pruned) Bitcoin node through Tor and use it solely for cryptocurrency purposes. Having a PC dedicated for crypto activity lowers the chances of getting a virus to do malicious stuff, a virus that you'd get from regular browsing and activities on your PC.

Why 1TB though, I wonder? Like, isn't the current blockchain size around (or less than) 350GB? Is that just to avoid spending yet another sum of money on more storage on the long run?

Somewhere around there. I don't believe that there would be a huge price difference between getting a 500GB disk and a 1TB disk drive, at least that's what I found recently.

You'll still have to accommodate for the OS and other miscellaneous stuff as well. If you're looking to get it for the long run, I'll think the tiny bit of price difference would be worth it for the possible headaches in the future.

Honestly the 500Gb vs 1Tb HDD price difference is insignificant (20$vs30$), getting an SSD for a node makes no sense, and also to be safe 4Gb of RAM can't hurt just to Future-proof the system. IT will help in the long run. IDKN anything software wise.  ::)

It's mostly all about hard drives after you take care of your internet line.

If you want to run a non-pruned full node, then buy two 500GB 7200RPM HDD drives, install them in a desktop and put them on RAID1. It will increase the read speeds when you upload data to other nodes, as reading will be a much bigger bottleneck than writing. While RAID1 protects your wallet from data loss from a drive failure since you are reading and writing to it 24/7. You'll have 500GB of space available for the blockchain. The blockchain requires >300GB as of today so this is something entry level if you want to set up a reliable full node cheaply.

If you have money to spare, buy 4 500GB hard disks plus a hardware controller, install them all inside the desktop and put them in RAID6, this will double your read speeds and give you 1TB of space total for the blockchain, letting you run it even when the blockchain size exceeds 500GB in a few years. It also allows up to two drives to fail giving you plenty of time to order replacements.

The best drives to use for nodes are the WD Black and Seagate Barracuda, as these have the highest transfer speeds. You can get them for $55-$65 each on Amazon. Do not use SSDs because you will be writing 30GB/month of blocks to them which will kill the drives quickly (specifically, the drives become read-only and writes will fail completely, which equates to failing to download new blocks and transactions).

P.S. if you choose the RAID6 route then buy a Highpoint RocketRaid as the controller, I hear they're really good.

I recently set up a full node on a Raspberry Pi 4. Here are the instructions: https://stadicus.github.io/RaspiBolt/

You can just set up the Bitcoin node if you aren't interested (yet) in the rest. In addition to a Bitcoin node, I also set up a Lightning node, an electrum server, JoinMarket, and a block explorer.

Actually, it does make sense.

The Disk I/O is most often the bottleneck when syncing the blockchain. A SSD can speed this up.

Storing the whole blockchain on a SDD is not necessary, but at least for the chainstate where lots of read/writes are done. This will significantly increase the synchronizing process.

I set up nodes on my PC and on a RPi 4, both using a disk for storage.

Initial sync:
The initial synch took a couple days on the PC and about a week on the RPi.

Ongoing:
I run the node on my PC only occasionally and it is frustrating that it takes an hour or so to synch when I open the wallet. On the other hand, my RPi node is always running so it is always synched. The disk has no problem keeping up.

Summary:
With a disk, initial synch is slow, and synching only when you open the wallet can result in long delays; but there are no problems if the node is always running. If this is ok, then you can save a lot of money by using a disk rather than an SSD. Keep in mind that although an SSD is faster, synching still takes time.

For benefit of ALL newbies, read this complete newbie-guide on how to set up your first Bitcoin node for the first time, https://hackernoon.com/a-complete-beginners-guide-to-installing-a-bitcoin-full-node-on-linux-2018-edition-cb8e384479ea


::)

Are you trolling? Because there's a new disinformation campaign/narrative that says "running a full node makes you a criminal".

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5296493.0

Forgive me if you think my question is dumb, is there anything to gain out of running a full bitcoin node compare to mining bitcoin? Are people making money somehow from running this nodes or something? Cos I'm confused, today you don't need to run a node to make bitcoin transactions through many available bitcoin wallet, what am I missing?

No. It does help the Bitcoin network by reinforcing the redundancy through the increase in the node count.  The primary benefits lies within the user of the node itself more than the Bitcoin network through the increase in privacy. Bitcoin node operators do not profit off the activities unlike Lightning nodes which are different.

You can set up a donation webpage and someone might donate through the address but it's pretty unlikely.

I was talking about one without the domain name but even if it has one, I'll configure it under my subdomain, the cost per year is like $10? I used to have one but I had to unfortunately divert my time to other projects. My goal was to have it display useful information (mempool, fees etc) on the page as well. I'll revisit the project soon and hopefully have a streamlined script for that as well.

Higher chance but I don't think it'll be worth to pursue that. Electrum servers, at least for me, tends to take a much greater resources than Bitcoin Core alone. I'll get a better server and run both but I don't expect to get any donation for either.

Most providers will sell you a 2GB Linux VPS for at least $15/month, which eclipses domain name costs. That's about the minimum you can run an Electrum server on and have a few hundred megabytes of memory leftover. The other option is to avoid self-hosting the website and buy some website-building service like Squarespace where they host everything for you but that costs a similar amount of money per month.

I have used Github Pages before and it's pretty capable for hosting static pages with donation addresses like the kind @ETFbitcoin mentioned, but they fail to perform any server-side task like logging in somewhere (unless you use your own server to host the server-side stuff). It should be able to display donation buttons, and interactive mempool and fees information if you fetch this info from a REST or Ajax endpoint to JavaScript.

Yeah. But the domain name costs is $10 per year or so, at least that's the case for my namecheap domain. If you're willing to go to a budget barebone server, you can probably push the costs to $10 per month, with kimsufi and that's before the discounts from the larger payment intervals. I never found the need for a domain name with a Bitcoin node. Mine was under a subdomain as I was already paying for the domain.

Yeah. My idea isn't about logging donations because it wouldn't matter for full nodes. No one would bother to see but it's nice to have to help sustain the server costs. That's why I don't think that donations would be able to sustain any nodes at least for a bit. I would use mine for other stuff than purely to host a full node and that's why it makes economic sense to me.

I've previously run mine with a static webpage with QR code and some basic graphs as referenced in this topic[1]. It didn't really consume any significant resources on my fairly cheap server so that's a plus.


[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5251684.msg54517296#msg54517296