More questions about bitcoin core

[Oshosondy]

I was recently reading a topic in bitcoin technical support section and I found this reply:

I noticed that when I sync my Bitcoin Core, with same level of connection (shows with WiFi Connection status), the sync speed is different.
When I sync my wallet to 2015 (first half), the speed becomes slower.

Not sure but maybe it's getting slower because the blockchain size is increasing exponentially each year.
Till the end of 2015, its size was around 55Gb, it has almost doubled by 2016 to reach ~100Gb, now it's ~270Gb. Hence it's normal to get slower.

I was thinking how next decade and century will be, I have found bitcoin core to be my best wallet but I have this issue that led me to these question. Please, I am still new and see my question not funny.

1. The bitcoin core wallet blockchain size is increasing and this makes the bytes needed to download it bigger, in 2015 it was 55Gb and it continuously increasing until now at 270GB, this makes synchronisation slower unless the computer speciculation is lastest and one of the best. But what about 100 years to this time, would this not result to problem by downloading terabytes of blockchain size?

2. Can I use bitcoin core as a lightweight client also, in a way I will not download the whole blockchain before use?

3. Or, what did you think would be the possible solution if the blockchain size is too high to download?

[ranochigo]

I was thinking how next decade and century will be, I have found bitcoin core to be my best wallet but I have this issue that led me to these question. Please, I am still new and see my question not funny.

1. The bitcoin core wallet blockchain size is increasing and this makes the bytes needed to download it bigger, in 2015 it was 55Gb and it continuously increasing until now at 270GB, this makes transaction slower unless the computer speciculation is lastest and one of the best. But what about 100 years to this time, would this not result to problem by downloading terabytes of blockchain size?

It will. Scaling solutions are in the pipeline which could hopefully alleviate the problem. Having increasing blockchain size doesn't affect the transaction speed, only the synchronization time. Moore's law should hopefully ensure a decent increase in capacity.

2. Can I use bitcoin core as a lightweight client also, in a way I will not download the whole blockchain before use?

No. Bitcoin Core cannot function like a lite client.

3. Or, what did you think would be the possible solution if the blockchain size is too high to download?

Pruning. It works but the main issue is with the bandwidth requirements.

[anu1908]

if you don't want to download the full client then a lightweight/spv wallet is your option. or you can run a full node on one computer and then use another spv connected to your node as your daily wallet.

[Oshosondy]

It will. Scaling solutions are in the pipeline which could hopefully alleviate the problem. Having increasing blockchain size doesn't affect the transaction speed, only the synchronization time.

Thank you for the correction, I have changed it to synchronization. Please, is there any latest update about scaling solution? I only know brief details about it and I only know it can only help in transaction speed, like the bech 32 (segwit address) in which 11 blocks is introduced for faster transaction and at slightly lower fee compared to normal bitcoin transaction of 10 blocks.

But how is it related to the decreasing bitcoin core wallet blockchain downloading size?

Pruning. It works but the main issue is with the bandwidth requirements.

Can you suggest me an article about pruning? I have not heard about tho before.

if you don't want to download the full client then a lightweight/spv wallet is your option. or you can run a full node on one computer and then use another spv connected to your node as your daily wallet.

I do not mean only me but to all whole bitcoin community, the blockchain size is still 270Gb now but I am afraid of when it might get to a terabyte as it is increasing all the time, most people may not want to use bitcoin core again if getting to more than a terabyte. There should be solution to make the size of the blockchain easy to download by then like now.

[LoyceV]

But what about 100 years to this time, would this not result to problem by downloading terabytes of blockchain size?

As long as Bitcoin blocks don't get larger, the blockchain can only grow at a linear rate. Bandwidth and storage capacity grows at an exponential rate, so 10 or 100 years from now, downloading the entire blockchain could very well be faster than it is now.

The good thing is: you'll only have to download it once. After that, it doesn't take much bandwidth to keep up with new blocks. My Bitcoin directory is a bit above 300 GB now. On an average month, I download more than that already, so unless your internet provider has data limits, it shouldn't be much of a problem.

3. Or, what did you think would be the possible solution if the blockchain size is too high to download?

Pruning. It works but the main issue is with the bandwidth requirements.

You could save 300 GB of bandwidth by downloading someone else's pruned directory, but you'll have to trust them (and they computer system) completely.
I even made a topic for this last year: Bitcoin Core pruned blockchain: download it here! (DON'T DO THIS!), but stopped updating (because the VPS was unreliable).

[HCP]

But what about 100 years to this time, would this not result to problem by downloading terabytes of blockchain size?

If, in 100 years time, computer hardware and network/storage technology are still be at current day levels then it might be an issue... but that isn't really likely. There are constant advances being made in computational power, network bandwidth and storage tech.

2. Can I use bitcoin core as a lightweight client also, in a way I will not download the whole blockchain before use?

No. The best you can do is "Pruning" as suggested by ranochigo... it still requires that you download the whole blockchain, but it means you don't have to store the entire blockchain at once as it discards older blocks after the pruning limit (user definable) is reached.

There are certain limitations with "pruned" wallets, so you do sacrifice some functionality by going down this path... (ie. importing private keys etc)


At the end of the day, the best option, if you don't want to or can't download/store the full blockchain, is to find a reliable and "trustworthy" SPV/Lite client.

[NeuroticFish]

Thank you for the correction, I have changed it to synchronization. Please, is there any latest update about scaling solution? I only know brief details about it and I only know it can only help in transaction speed, like the bech 32 (segwit address) in which 11 blocks is introduced for faster transaction and at slightly lower fee compared to normal bitcoin transaction of 10 blocks.

But how is it related to the decreasing bitcoin core wallet blockchain downloading size?

Using bech32 addresses decreases the fee requirements and may lead to the transaction get included faster in a block.
But the network and mining works the same, at about one block every 10 minutes, no matter how big is the blockchain or what kind of transactions you make.

Can you suggest me an article about pruning? I have not heard about tho before.

This may be close enough to what you need https://coinguides.org/bitcoin-blockchain-pruning/
Pruning only saves less info to the HDD. You normally still have to download the entire blockchain (so you don't have to trust any third party for the the correctness of the information)
As HCP said, pruning is not a great option for most users.

I do not mean only me but to all whole bitcoin community, the blockchain size is still 270Gb now but I am afraid of when it might get to a terabyte as it is increasing all the time, most people may not want to use bitcoin core again if getting to more than a terabyte. There should be solution to make the size of the blockchain easy to download by then like now.

Indeed, the size of blockchain may have made quite a big number of users chose SPV wallets instead of Bitcoin Core, but for now that's far from being a problem.

[ranochigo]

Thank you for the correction, I have changed it to synchronization. Please, is there any latest update about scaling solution? I only know brief details about it and I only know it can only help in transaction speed, like the bech 32 (segwit address) in which 11 blocks is introduced for faster transaction and at slightly lower fee compared to normal bitcoin transaction of 10 blocks.

But how is it related to the decreasing bitcoin core wallet blockchain downloading size?

Segwit changed the format of the addresses and transaction mainly. It didn't change anything about the blocks. Read BIP141 for more info. Segwit transcations are slightly smaller as compared to legacy transactions.

Read up on Schnorr signatures and lightning network. It does help to reduce the transactions on the network and the sizes.

Can you suggest me an article about pruning? I have not heard about tho before.

Its an option in Bitcoin Core that allows you to delete blocks that you no longer need. It helps tremendously with the space requirements but does have some downsides.

[LoyceV]

If, in 100 years time, computer hardware and network/storage technology are still be at current day levels then it might be an issue...

The History of Computer Data Storage, in Pictures might help to put it into perspective. Just 100 years ago, there was no computer storage! Just 40 years ago (according to the linked article), 1 GB was the size of a fridge:


High-end phones now have enough storage capacity for the entire blockchain, and it can fit several times on a (high-end) microSD-card.

[Oshosondy]

3. Or, what did you think would be the possible solution if the blockchain size is too high to download?

Pruning. It works but the main issue is with the bandwidth requirements.

You could save 300 GB of bandwidth by downloading someone else's pruned directory, but you'll have to trust them (and they computer system) completely.
I even made a topic for this last year: Bitcoin Core pruned blockchain: download it here! (DON'T DO THIS!), but stopped updating (because the VPS was unreliable).

This is just the solution, which means at that time, pruning will be the solution to use bitcoin core. But you also said that trustworthy providers will be used. At the time, there will be trust worthy providers. And instead of using bitcoin core as a light weight, pruning is the good option.

There are certain limitations with "pruned" wallets, so you do sacrifice some functionality by going down this path... (ie. importing private keys etc)

Do you mean I will not be able to import my private keys on another wallet than the SPV light client wallet used at first?

[Charles-Tim]

If, in 100 years time, computer hardware and network/storage technology are still be at current day levels then it might be an issue...

The History of Computer Data Storage, in Pictures might help to put it into perspective. Just 100 years ago, there was no computer storage! Just 40 years ago (according to the linked article), 1 GB was the size of a fridge:


High-end phones now have enough storage capacity for the entire blockchain, and it can fit several times on a (high-end) microSD-card.

In my opinion, I think the indirect suggestion could also be a solution, spv wallets are not perfect enough, it is good to run the full node client which is the original bitcoin core. In the past 1 GB is a size of a fridge, there was a time computers have less than 4 GB ram, less processor and less than 300 GB ROM as memory. Always, technology is changing, common phones have over 8 GB RAM and more than 500 GB to 1 TB of ROM not to talk of computers that have higher capacities with more sophistications.

So, in the future, technology will be more advanced in a way that full node client which is the bitcoin core will be easy to use, the blockchain even with more memory capacity will be easily downloadable when compared to now.

Also, technology is advancing in downloading speed. 

[ranochigo]

Do you mean I will not be able to import my private keys on another wallet than the SPV light client wallet used at first?

No. The nature with pruned wallet is that the wallet will only save the information (UTXOs and transaction info) that is relevant to the user. This means that if you're going to import a private key into the wallet, the client cannot rescan the blockchain to obtain the full transaction history that is related to the addresses within the wallet. This would result in incomplete and missing information.

[HCP]

Do you mean I will not be able to import my private keys on another wallet than the SPV light client wallet used at first?

Once you prune blocks, you will no longer be able to import private keys into Bitcoin Core... but you won't be able to "rescan" the blockchain to find any transaction info. (Thanks LoyceV! )


This is because, as per the error message, "rescan" is disabled once you prune blocks... as the block data is effectively "missing" once the blocks get pruned and there cannot be rescanned. If you prune and then later need to import a private key, you'd need to redownload the entire blockchain.


You will of course, still be able to export you private keys from Bitcoin Core and import them into a Lite/SPV wallet etc.

[LoyceV]

Once you prune blocks, you will no longer be able to import private keys into Bitcoin Core...

Small exception: you actually can But it's only useful before funding the addresses as the balance will be shown as zero.

[Oshosondy]

This is because, as per the error message, "rescan" is disabled once you prune blocks... as the block data is effectively "missing" once the blocks get pruned and there cannot be rescanned. If you prune and then later need to import a private key, you'd need to redownload the entire blockchain.


You will of course, still be able to export you private keys from Bitcoin Core and import them into a Lite/SPV wallet etc.

That means I will only be able to export private keys only, I will not be able to import new private keys.

[HCP]

Once you prune blocks, you will no longer be able to import private keys into Bitcoin Core...

Small exception: you actually can But it's only useful before funding the addresses as the balance will be shown as zero.

Ah yes... the old "forget the 'label' parameter" trick!

I was using:

Code:

importprivkey "Kxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" false

Which of course, is equivalent to:

Code:

importprivkey "Kxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" false true

because the 'rescan' parameter defaults to true... #facepalm


If you use:

Code:

importprivkey "Kxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" "" false

To try and import with the empty 'label' and without rescan, it'll work!

[philipma1957]

A decent pc for about 650usd can max the 920 mbps download speed on a verizon fios connection.

I just downloaded the entire fullsized core in nine hours on a network using switch that limits to 92mpbs

so a full sized  download on a pretty fast 920 mbps connection can do it in about 1 hour.

newest pc’s have 10gb  connections so in theory a six to ten minute download may be possible. if the cpu and the ram and the nvme 2 can write at this speed.

they can’t  the fastest nvme 2 can write about 4000-5000 mbps.

so a commercial high speed connection could down load in as little as 13-15 minutes if and only if uploads are available at 4-5gb.  they may exist I am not aware of being able to upload commercially at that speed. 

but since we were doing 44k    25 years ago

and in 2006 15mbps was good.

I got 200mbps three years ago.

1gb is around for years.

So I feel That 10gb will become common in under 10:years which will handle a 1 tb blockchain easy peasy.

as for phone wallets they will not be full sized. they will be pruned versions.