what kind of node asic has

[dmonrey002]

i just want to know. what kind of node asic has. as far as i know. when you buy asic miner.  and use it. you dont need a client.  all you need to do is get the ip of that miner. then go their pool which is antpool right?. is asic miner  a full node?.

[LoyceV]

is asic miner  a full node?.

No. The pool runs a node, and tells you what to mine.

[TheQuin]

You are right that you don't need to run a node you just need to point the ASIC miner at a pool. I would suggest you do some research in the Mining > Pools board of this forum so you don't get ripped off at Antpool.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=41.0

[bob123]

An ASIC is just a piece of hardware specialized for one calculation (in this case: sha256 hashing).

You can either use it to mine solo (which requires any kind of full node and software; not profitable) or you join a mining pool.
When joining a mining pool the block generation, etc.. is done by the head of the miningpool. They just 'assign you the work your miner has to deliver'.

[dmonrey002]

in short. all Mining pools run a full node?. or some of pools are not?. 

[mocacinno]

in short. all Mining pools run a full node?. or some of pools are not?.  

If you want to run a pool, you need access to a node... So yes, they are either running a node, or they are paying somebody to run a node they can query.
The pool needs at very least the header of the previous block, and if they don't want to mine blocks with only the coinbase transaction, they also need information about the broadcasted transactions... And if they want to include these transactions, they need to update their utxo set, so they need to parse the complete blockchain... In other words: they need to run a node

[HeRetiK]

in short. all Mining pools run a full node?. or some of pools are not?.  

If you want to run a pool, you need access to a node... So yes, they are either running a node, or they are paying somebody to run a node they can query.
The pool needs at very least the header of the previous block, and if they don't want to mine blocks with only the coinbase transaction, they also need information about the broadcasted transactions... And if they want to include these transactions, they need to update their utxo set, so they need to parse the complete blockchain... In other words: they need to run a node

I think what OP is asking is whether mining pool operators use a full or a pruned node.

In general it seems to make sense for mining pools to run a full node, since if you already harness millions of dollars worth of computational power there's no sense on skimping when it comes to running a node, amirite?

But from a technical perspective it seems like they could run a pruned node just as well, since they only care about current transactions. Or would a mining pool be prevented from publishing blocks if they are not connected to the network as a full node?

[jackg]

in short. all Mining pools run a full node?. or some of pools are not?. 

All mining pools should really run a full node. I'm sure there are shortcuts but it might make them a bit slower.

I think what OP is asking is whether mining pool operators use a full or a pruned node.

In general it seems to make sense for mining pools to run a full node, since if you already harness millions of dollars worth of computational power there's no sense on skimping when it comes to running a node, amirite?

But from a technical perspective it seems like they could run a pruned node just as well, since they only care about current transactions. Or would a mining pool be prevented from publishing blocks if they are not connected to the network as a full node?

Something tells me they might not get accepted if they don't run a full node. Or they'd get DDoS a rediculous amount if they tried to get away without running one.

What is forgotton is that miners should also be the main node runners and they should be able to distribute the blockchain. And why wouldn't you want to distribute it if you are earning money from it already and a greater seeding of the blockchain might make more people get into it. I'm sure F2Pool, Antpool and ViaBTC use some sort of script that goes through the mempool anyway to gather data on it with a base of a full node.

[DannyHamilton]

But from a technical perspective it seems like they could run a pruned node just as well, since they only care about current transactions. Or would a mining pool be prevented from publishing blocks if they are not connected to the network as a full node?

Something tells me they might not get accepted if they don't run a full node.

Why not?

A valid block is a valid block.  The protocol and the rest of the network doesn't care how that block came into being, nor does the network know how that block came into being.

Or they'd get DDoS a rediculous amount if they tried to get away without running one.

How would you know if they are running a pruned node or not?

What is forgotton is that miners should also be the main node runners and they should be able to distribute the blockchain.

Miners should create valid blocks.  That's all.  They are welcome to run full nodes and distribute the blockchain if they want to, but there is no requirement for them to do so.

And why wouldn't you want to distribute it if you are earning money from it already and a greater seeding of the blockchain might make more people get into it.

Perhaps you are only trying to make a quick profit, and don't care about the long term viability?

[jackg]

Or they'd get DDoS a rediculous amount if they tried to get away without running one.

How would you know if they are running a pruned node or not?

If the pool is big enough, there will be people who run analytics on it.
If you can't connect to a pool when initially syncing (there must be some sort of error if you try to connect to a node with an empty blockchain and it can't get the data it wants isn't there)? I'm still waiting for a full sync of core (apparently I have 22 days left).

What is forgotton is that miners should also be the main node runners and they should be able to distribute the blockchain.

Miners should create valid blocks.  That's all.  They are welcome to run full nodes and distribute the blockchain if they want to, but there is no requirement for them to do so.

They get a profit from the adoption of a chain as more people will start in the coin. Newbies also generally probably pay higher fees than other older members who can wait on their transactions as there's not as much excitement with sending a transaction now as there was when I sent say my first transaction. A greater bandwidth means that more people cna download and run core well as there's less people wanting to access the data per node.

And why wouldn't you want to distribute it if you are earning money from it already and a greater seeding of the blockchain might make more people get into it.

Perhaps you are only trying to make a quick profit, and don't care about the long term viability?

But they're skilled miners/developers in most cases of pools.
Also, if you have to reindex from a non-full node and you're bad a plotting failovers then the sync may take a bit longer initially.

[HeRetiK]

But from a technical perspective it seems like they could run a pruned node just as well, since they only care about current transactions. Or would a mining pool be prevented from publishing blocks if they are not connected to the network as a full node?

Something tells me they might not get accepted if they don't run a full node.

Why not?

A valid block is a valid block.  The protocol and the rest of the network doesn't care how that block came into being, nor does the network know how that block came into being.

That's what I thought, thank you for confirming my suspicion. I was thinking that I may be missing a subtle technical reason for a mining pool being required to run a full node but I couldn't think of one.

Or they'd get DDoS a rediculous amount if they tried to get away without running one.

How would you know if they are running a pruned node or not?

If the pool is big enough, there will be people who run analytics on it.

I'm pretty sure most miners just try which pool works best for them and then point their hashrate on it. Unfortunately people are barely caring about keeping the hashrate decentralized, I doubt many care about whether their pool of choice runs a full node or not as long as its reliable. Besides, if your pool is large enough you already got a big fat target painted on your back either way. There's plenty of reasons to DDoS a mining pool, them not running a full node probably being one of the pettiest.

What is forgotton is that miners should also be the main node runners and they should be able to distribute the blockchain.

Miners should create valid blocks.  That's all.  They are welcome to run full nodes and distribute the blockchain if they want to, but there is no requirement for them to do so.

They get a profit from the adoption of a chain as more people will start in the coin. Newbies also generally probably pay higher fees than other older members who can wait on their transactions as there's not as much excitement with sending a transaction now as there was when I sent say my first transaction. A greater bandwidth means that more people cna download and run core well as there's less people wanting to access the data per node.

From a purely business-oriented perspective, miners don't care which chain to follow. Rationally speaking they will simply follow the currency that is the most profitable. I also don't think that miners care much about user experience when it comes to a newbie opting for the Bitcoin Core wallet.

Whether they should run a full node from a "corporate responsibility" point of view is a different question of course. But I doubt it meaningfully influences their bottom line.

Also, if you have to reindex from a non-full node and you're bad a plotting failovers then the sync may take a bit longer initially.

That I could imagine to be a valid point of concern for a mining pool operator.