What's the big deal about an 80Gb directory. The file sizes are still fairly small, and the notebook I am using now has a 2Tb hard drive. It wasn't that expensive either. If you are on a chromebook, or a mobile, then I can see it would matter, but for a reasonable PC, I'd rather have full control of my wallet.
I suppose it depends on the situation. The web hosting service I use charges $0.10 per Gb. That's $8/month, nearly $100 per year... Plus bandwidth costs... Running a full node on my website would cost $1-200/year, and the blockchain is certainly not getting smaller Just run it in pruning mode then. If you limit it to 10 GB, then that is only $1/month. Out of curiosity, what host are you using? (If you don't want to share, no big deal). |
|
|
|
Hello,
I wanted to know how I can this rcpuser and rcppassword and serving
Sorry my english, I am brazilian.
Thank you.
What do you mean with serving? Do you want to know where to set them? I was wondering how do I get the rcpuser and rcppassword You can just create them. |
|
|
|
I want to use an external drive because my ssd has limited space.
Thanks.
the bootstrap.dat goes in the -datadir= folder. With newer version using the bootstrap.dat is only useful under certain conditions, if you have not yet downloaded it, you can just skip it. Can you clarify what you mean? I'm using the most current client bitcoin-qt 32bit and on opening it's showing 6 years behind..... Christ I can't believe bitcoin has been around that long now.... What he means is that bootstrap.dat has not been useful since bitcoin 0.10.x and up due to headers first sync. Consequently, it is often in fact slower to use the .dat file compared to just connecting to the bitcoin network. From what I read it's faster to just download with the client than to download the bootstrap.dat separately, but surely it's faster to use bootstrap.dat if you already have it, right? Maybe I'll give it a try later and see how it goes. Maybe, it could be just about the same if the bottleneck is your CPU or memory. :-) If you are on a metered connection the savings in the cost of bandwidth might make using a bootstrap.dat downloaded elsewhere preferable. Downloading a bootstrap.dat on a free connection at work or elsewhere could be the only viable option for those with limited bandwidth at home. Good point. For this use case, that is one option. |
|
|
|
I want to use an external drive because my ssd has limited space.
Thanks.
the bootstrap.dat goes in the -datadir= folder. With newer version using the bootstrap.dat is only useful under certain conditions, if you have not yet downloaded it, you can just skip it. Can you clarify what you mean? I'm using the most current client bitcoin-qt 32bit and on opening it's showing 6 years behind..... Christ I can't believe bitcoin has been around that long now.... What he means is that bootstrap.dat has not been useful since bitcoin 0.10.x and up due to headers first sync. Consequently, it is often in fact slower to use the .dat file compared to just connecting to the bitcoin network. From what I read it's faster to just download with the client than to download the bootstrap.dat separately, but surely it's faster to use bootstrap.dat if you already have it, right? Maybe I'll give it a try later and see how it goes. Maybe, it could be just about the same if the bottleneck is your CPU or memory. :-) |
|
|
|
I want to use an external drive because my ssd has limited space.
Thanks.
the bootstrap.dat goes in the -datadir= folder. With newer version using the bootstrap.dat is only useful under certain conditions, if you have not yet downloaded it, you can just skip it. Can you clarify what you mean? I'm using the most current client bitcoin-qt 32bit and on opening it's showing 6 years behind..... Christ I can't believe bitcoin has been around that long now.... What he means is that bootstrap.dat has not been useful since bitcoin 0.10.x and up due to headers first sync. Consequently, it is often in fact slower to use the .dat file compared to just connecting to the bitcoin network. |
|
|
|
(block 374185)
That block was made in September 2015, google shows me this happened during that time: ...the UK-based exchange released the private keys to hundreds of addresses containing small amounts of bitcoin. Thousands of transactions have flooded the network as users seek to send the bitcoin held by these addresses to their own wallets. CoinWallet has indicated that it intends to give away $48,000 in free bitcoin using this method. At the time of writing, there were over 70,000 unconfirmed transactions waiting to be processed by the network. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-businesses-take-steps-prepare-coinwallets-september-stress-test-1441917829Would something like this cause the blockchain download process to take so long? Definitely. Bitcoin blocks contains transactions which the user needs to verify and/or download. With larger transaction volumes, the size would be higher with more transaction per block and hence making the synchronization time longer. You would realise that synchronization is relatively fast at the start and gets slower towards the end. If the CPU is only at 15% its not the issue though. Its either connection (slow / bad peers) or HDD speed. Perhaps. But perhaps it is going to sleep when he is not using it and then when he is looking at the Activity Monitor it is slowing down background processes. With 0.11.2, it shouldn't happen with App Nap (he can verify in Activity Monitor under Energy), but it could depending on which version of OS X he is running. ;-) I agree, it should be a much higher percentage than that but if it is being slowed in the background, that could explain it. All MacBook Airs since 2011 have SSDs (iirc) and so that should be plenty fast. If it is an older model, then that would be useful to know. I'd also be curious to know: 1. Disk space available? e.g. if it is a 128GB SSD, he could be running low on disk space and that could be an issue. 2. How many peers show up? |
|
|
|
you can download the blockchain manual as a bootstrap.dat. there should be one on the forum, if not try the bitcoin website
This is a bad idea and no longer useful with the last 3+ versions. You said you were on a Macbook Air. Have you checked the sleep settings? Which version of OS X are you running? |
|
|
|
I know you can view the kernel log via web gui but is there a way to export what is in the kernel log from boot up?
You probably want to ask this in the correct section. Perhaps in here if you are talking about an Antminer S5: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=40.0 |
|
|
|
i mean, something which adds validity of the owners,
although others have a private key or someone managed to open wallet.dat,and something that maintain privacy in network transactions.
If one can't keep their private keys safe or your wallet password safe, what makes you think that they would be able to protect their PGP key safe to prove ownership of the keys or wallet? As far as privacy of network transactions, how do you envision pgp helping? |
|
|
|
So using the CIYAM Trade application along with using a CIYAM console acting as a Bitcoin/Litecoin wallet I demonstrated to my wife how you could exchange LTC for BTC without a 3rd party (or fees other than tx fees) and apparently it was so boring she fell asleep.
...
So I've built a decentralised exchange but I am getting the feeling that I have probably wasted my time doing so (am glad it hasn't taken me more than a couple of weeks).
Does anyone really think that this kind of idea is going to work?
A decentralized exchange with a good interface would be quite useful for many. Can it do the reverse? e.g. BTC for LTC? I presume this related to the CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and the check <data1> against <sig1> questions....I haven't looked at the code above yet. Congrats on getting it working. Why do you think you've wasted your time? |
|
|
|
Solved  You should probably post how it was solved so that if someone finds this discussion with the same problem it will be helpful. ;-) |
|
|
|
You may have to use something like pywallet to edit it. I don't believe you can do it in Core.
An alternative, of course, would be to export all the keys, delete that one and import, but pywallet seems cleaner.
I don't think pywallet works here. Watch only was only added in 0.10.0 which was released in Early 2015. Pywallet hasn't been updated since Sep 2014. Also, I tried it and it didn't work. Hmmmm. I'm not sure then, I would've thought it would work okay. You could always export them all then, clear it, and just reimport the ones you want. :-) |
|
|
|
|
You may have to use something like pywallet to edit it. I don't believe you can do it in Core.
An alternative, of course, would be to export all the keys, delete that one and import, but pywallet seems cleaner.
|
|
|
|
...
If he compresses it first, It should work then.
The magnitude of files needed for the SD card is too much for it to handle, however, one file will copy over fine.
As SanDisk are one of the two largest flash makers (the other bing Kingston), it shouldn't be the disk itself, just flash technology in genreal.
It may also depend on the type of drive: SDHC, SDHD, SDXC... ETC, this may have an effect, or whether his drive's port actually has the power to power the drive enougth to power it.
Title: "encrypted wallet backup to SDdisk" 1st sentence: " experimenting with wallet security" Next: "I then backed up the unencrypted wallet directly to a sub-directory on the SDcard" Next: "Then I encrypted the wallet" Next: "...backup the encrypted wallet directly to the SDcard, and this failed." Clearly he is talking about backing up the wallet, not the entire directory. Perhaps not a sig campaigner, if not, apologies. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin core 0.10.x, yes.
0.11.x, don't believe so.
|
|
|
|
Sorry I should have been a bit clearer in my description. Core uses the blockchain stored on the hard disk. I backed it up by using a simple file copy, and that worked perfectly. I did think of trying to run a node on my chromebook using and SDcard for the storage, but I gave it up. One of the reasons was the point you made. I made the backup of the blockchain because it took me over two weeks to download it using public wifi.
I could do a direct backup of the unencrypted wallet, bu nowt get the error every time I try to backup since I have encrypted the wallet.
You were quite clear. It could be an error on the SD card. Do you have a second one to try it with? If he compresses it first, It should work then. The magnitude of files needed for the SD card is too much for it to handle, however, one file will copy over fine. As SanDisk are one of the two largest flash makers (the other bing Kingston), it shouldn't be the disk itself, just flash technology in genreal. It may also depend on the type of drive: SDHC, SDHD, SDXC... ETC, this may have an effect, or whether his drive's port actually has the power to power the drive enougth to power it. He is only talking about storing the wallet on the SD card as he has said several times. Consequently, the "magnitude of the files needed" to store the wallet there is not an issue. The wallet.dat file is almost always quite small. Many of the people with sig campaigns are just posting to get their post count up, so their advice is best taken with a grain of salt. |
|
|
|
Sorry I should have been a bit clearer in my description. Core uses the blockchain stored on the hard disk. I backed it up by using a simple file copy, and that worked perfectly. I did think of trying to run a node on my chromebook using and SDcard for the storage, but I gave it up. One of the reasons was the point you made. I made the backup of the blockchain because it took me over two weeks to download it using public wifi.
I could do a direct backup of the unencrypted wallet, bu nowt get the error every time I try to backup since I have encrypted the wallet.
You were quite clear. It could be an error on the SD card. Do you have a second one to try it with? |
|
|
|
|
Do you have the exact error? I presume you are talking about using Bitcoin Core's backup wallet functionality to backup directly to the SD card?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
