Congratulation, Bitcoin has reached 500 GB size hard disk data

[LoyceV]

@loyce
the MANY topics talking about blockchain vs hard drive size.. mention the same doomsday about how hard drives and blockchains cant cope.. its the norm expected evolution of the topic of such. so best bite the bullet and state the facts before the fud

As always: it depends
It's a fact that SSDs have much better access time than HDDs. Linear throughput isn't relevant.
I've synced Bitcoin Core recently on a HDD within a day, but it was a server with enough RAM, and high enough dbcache. There are multiple factors that can be the bottleneck if they're bad enough: RAM, disk, CPU or internet. Lack of RAM can be partially substituted by a faster disk. But you know all this.

Lets say they got it down to 10 seconds access time. I bet some old cdrom drives that people use for running Live CDs has seek times of 1 second no doubt. Yeah it's a bit slow but you learn to deal with it. Same idea here. For all the TB of storage, you would be willing to put up with it, maybe not you in particular but some group of people would no doubt.

Sure, and some people are still using the Commodore Datasette. And even that thing did the only thing tape can do: linear reading the entire data file.

I don't know why people want to specifically buy SSD drives for this?...... you can go much cheaper and just buy bigger SATA drives for the same price or less. SATA drives are also slower to boot up and slower in retrieving data than SSDs, but will a few milliseconds really make that much of a difference for average users?

Yes! Once used to an SSD for booting, you don't want to go back.

[1715152481]

1715152481

[1715152481]

1715152481

[1715152481]

1715152481

[franky1]

@loyce
the MANY topics talking about blockchain vs hard drive size.. mention the same doomsday about how hard drives and blockchains cant cope.. its the norm expected evolution of the topic of such. so best bite the bullet and state the facts before the fud

As always: it depends
It's a fact that SSDs have much better access time than HDDs. Linear throughput isn't relevant.
I've synced Bitcoin Core recently on a HDD within a day, but it was a server with enough RAM, and high enough dbcache. There are multiple factors that can be the bottleneck if they're bad enough: RAM, disk, CPU or internet. Lack of RAM can be partially substituted by a faster disk. But you know all this.

yea yea yea..
but the topic.. is hard drive. so to address the hard drive factor.
there is no need for some special hardware or expense of needing some large super fast device/server

boom. end of story

we could digress and say if you want to download the blockchain faster (as just a download process) by ensuing you have fibre and setting peers to be a higher number than 1-2 (to get more then ~9 blocks a second*)
*(where 36mbit/s is needed for the average pre 2017 data and 80mbit/s post 2017 data)
(then only ~1mbit/s once uptodate/synced)

we could digress and say the validation of blocks can be reduced in delay/bottleneck with high multithread CPU and high ram.. but it actually makes no difference if you have 256gb ram or 32gb ram
when a validation process only needs (purely for validation) 1gb. then you only need maybe 4gb to do all your normal windows desktop activity, plus active scan antivirus plus watching a movie/gaming while you wait for the sync while also having ram spare for the sync
having 256gb of ram on a server is wasted/overkill

there is no need to buy a whole server (usual cries).
bitcoin can sync fast enough on normal consumer bought equipment in their home
even the core devs have deemed upto 4mb a block data as being consumer safe and not cause a need for the doomsday cries of some people you know well shouting "but centralisation" "but servers"

i know you're subtly now admitting defeat that hard drives are not the issue without flat out saying so. by avoiding continuation of hard drives to then digress to talk about ram, internet..
for instance wanting to digress the discussion to now talk about Pc's with 1gb ram(loyce:'Take an old netbook with 1 GB RAM').. but come on.. even a decade ago normal retail bought pc's had more than 1gb ram. so dont do that silly narrative (subtle)"we are stuck with windows-XP era technology so we are doomed and bitcoin is slow" please dont follow your chum group narrative of excuses of decades old tech as sync delay reasons
as you sound like the fools of "but HD snapshot cameras wont be a thing because floppy disks only hold 1.4mb"
that mindset was soooo 1990's.. so dont be like that

and stop the subtle narrative that you only experienced a 24 sync using a super spec server that you wish you had access to, i know all the scripts your chums repeat, no matter how subtly you imply them here.. trying not to be so verbatim, but still trying to hint/push them

and no dont even hit the reply button with the script of "but i never said what you said i said, strawman". i know the silly narratives of your chums, in many topics. i know the subtlety you are trying to imply, but making it not sound like their narrative, whilst you still hint at the same script propaganda points they always do.
(again highlighting the whataboutism of a '1gb ram notebook', hinting of your server experiences)

[BlackHatCoiner]

We're not asking people to run full nodes - we have enough of those for now.

Bandwidth-wise, sure, the network functions brilliantly. We have tens of thousands of nodes, some of which have the best Internet speed universally. There isn't going to be a difference if people launch more nodes. But running a full node is without doubt an important part of the system for those who value privacy and security. I'm of the opinion that running a node is rather of an individual's benefit, than a network's benefit.

And that's before we even mention that owning a lightning node requires running a full node.

[franky1]

We're not asking people to run full nodes - we have enough of those for now.

Bandwidth-wise, sure, the network functions brilliantly. We have tens of thousands of nodes, some of which have the best Internet speed universally. There isn't going to be a difference if people launch more nodes. But running a full node is without doubt an important part of the system for those who value privacy and security. I'm of the opinion that running a node is rather of an individual's benefit, than a network's benefit.

And that's before we even mention that owning a lightning node requires running a full node.

oh look the usual crowd, and then the usual side-ssles pitch to a silly subnetwork that has no blockchain
(facepalm)

though this topic is about bitcoins blockchain size. seems a certain group love to  do all they can to subtly and implicitly pretend bitcoin is only for the elite or pretend everyone they know things it is and all that crap. while then adding in a sale pitch at some part in their conversation about another network.. boring not original. shameful

funny thing is majority of promised use cases of lightning wouldnt work.. let alone if you needed a laptop when you go to just purchase a small pack of chewing gum or a small coffee in those small use cases

reality:
lightning is a thing where idiots load up funds from multiple blockchain networks. and bridge to lightning(much the same as many other subnetworks that do the same thing(yep lightning is nothing special)) locking up value with a hub/manager and use their lite-app on their phone
lightning is not even a network thats made to work only with a bitcoin blockchain. infact people can create balance without any funds locked at all.. thats how bad it is, it can fractional reserve

but yea doesnt matter much anyway because there are many other sub networks that have more liquidity locked up from bitcoin locks. to then play around with silly micro amount units, becasue many realise lightning is the unfit network people need to know about.

even other similar buggy networks like avalanche which is only 1 year old has more liquidity locked than lightning. so i keep wondering why are these same fools  trying to say bad stuff about bitcoin, trying to divert people away from using/securing bitcoin.. just to then promote some other network called lightning which is not even going to meet expectations or fulfil its promises

but hey. if they dont like me calling out Lightning flaws. maybe they need to stop snake oil selling lightning while trying to pretend they are bitcoiners

maybe they should/could try to back things up with stats data and math. not their subtle crappy attempts to try to say bitcoin doesnt need more nodes, bitcoin can function fine with les people whilst then promoting another network
idiots

[BlackHatCoiner]

funny part is lightning doesnt have a blockchain

Funniest part is that it's 2023, and you still don't know what's lightning.

funny think is majority of use cases iof lightning wouldnt work if you needed a laptop when you go to just purchsae a small pack of chewing gum or a small coffee

People use these cool devices a few years now. Check them out: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=smartphones

lightning is not even a network that forced to work only with a bitcoin blockchain. infact people can create balance without any funds locked at all..

How? Please tell me, and I'll finally stop locking funds like an idiot. Creating money out of thin air instead of having a job never crossed my mind to be honest.

[franky1]

very first lightning payment was done on using value pegged from........ LITECOIN
people can do that.. its not just locked to bitcoin

users do not need to lock funds just to access lightning funds
a. get inbound balance from hub managers (giveaways, faucets)
b. thor turbo gave msat balance with no confirmed funding utxo
c, users dont even need to be a 2-of-2 co-signer of funds to ensure no cheating
    = cheating can happen
    = ownership of payment promises are not guaranteed

and yea there are many other subnetworks that act just like lightning (bridging between many networks)
lightning is not special or unique. its 7 years old and has less liquidity than other subnetworks

maybe if you tried to research you will see more then the small pamphlet advert you have been reading and narrowing your views around

back to the topic. unlike some that want to
-pretend bitcoin only works running a server (facepalm)
-pretend bitcoin only works running on a super high spec hardware designed mainly for server architecture (facepalm)
-pretends it wont work on normal consumer class hardware available today (facepalm)
-pretends its only for the elite.. (facepalm)
-pretends bitcoin cant work by using [insert hardware spec pc of 18 years ago]  (facepalm)

bitcoin can run on normal consumer hardware and even core devs admit it
so all these subnetwork salesmen.. do YOUR RESEARCH
and realise your subnetworks have the flaws!

[BitcoinMoses]

We're not asking people to run full nodes - we have enough of those for now.

Bandwidth-wise, sure, the network functions brilliantly. We have tens of thousands of nodes, some of which have the best Internet speed universally. There isn't going to be a difference if people launch more nodes. But running a full node is without doubt an important part of the system for those who value privacy and security. I'm of the opinion that running a node is rather of an individual's benefit, than a network's benefit.

And that's before we even mention that owning a lightning node requires running a full node.

oh look the usual crowd, and then the usual side-ssles pitch to a silly subnetwork that has no blockchain
(facepalm)

though this topic is about bitcoins blockchain size. seems a certain group love to  do all they can to subtly and implicitly pretend bitcoin is only for the elite or pretend everyone they know things it is and all that crap. while then adding in a sale pitch at some part in their conversation about another network.. boring not original. shameful

funny thing is majority of promised use cases of lightning wouldnt work.. let alone if you needed a laptop when you go to just purchase a small pack of chewing gum or a small coffee in those small use cases

reality:
lightning is a thing where idiots load up funds from multiple blockchain networks. and bridge to lightning(much the same as many other subnetworks that do the same thing(yep lightning is nothing special)) locking up value with a hub/manager and use their lite-app on their phone
lightning is not even a network thats made to work only with a bitcoin blockchain. infact people can create balance without any funds locked at all.. thats how bad it is, it can fractional reserve

but yea doesnt matter much anyway because there are many other sub networks that have more liquidity locked up from bitcoin locks. to then play around with silly micro amount units, becasue many realise lightning is the unfit network people need to know about.

even other similar buggy networks like avalanche which is only 1 year old has more liquidity locked than lightning. so i keep wondering why are these same fools  trying to say bad stuff about bitcoin, trying to divert people away from using/securing bitcoin.. just to then promote some other network called lightning which is not even going to meet expectations or fulfil its promises

but hey. if they dont like me calling out Lightning flaws. maybe they need to stop snake oil selling lightning while trying to pretend they are bitcoiners

maybe they should/could try to back things up with stats data and math. not their subtle crappy attempts to try to say bitcoin doesnt need more nodes, bitcoin can function fine with les people whilst then promoting another network
idiots

Interesting ! good information. I am thinking to do some fractional reserve banking with BTC. I need further information.

I heard the news that bitcoin is most close to receiving 500 GB size hard disk data, so I am just confused if a newbie or beginner tries to start download bitcoin, how much minimum hard disk he must buy and prepare?

how many blockchains are there until bitcoin is mined?, is possible 10 terabytes?,

Is the default hard disk still good to use, or move to SSD?

I just try to download, but when over 3 days, my hard disk is slow to receive blockchain data, seems low in header sync when opening and closing bitcoin core. (I use a default Hard disk of 10 terabyte)

don't worry about blockchain data size, there we will find new solution to it by segmenting the data size.

[Sarah Azhari]

@sarah
850-481 = 369
imagining a 1.3mb average data load now per block
~ another 283k blocks
so about the 1.05m blockheight mark.. about 5 years from now

So, we do have not to worry much if having 1 terabyte HD right now, because 5 years is enough to start saving money if the user wants to upgrade to 5 or 10 TB. The problem is, If we change to a new HD (from 1 TB to 5 TB), will it Synchronization speed will be the same as before? Because I tried it and changed the target to external HD, it need more time to verify the block and syncing hardware

[franky1]

@sarah
850-481 = 369
imagining a 1.3mb average data load now per block
~ another 283k blocks
so about the 1.05m blockheight mark.. about 5 years from now

So, we do have not to worry much if having 1 terabyte HD right now, because 5 years is enough to start saving money if the user wants to upgrade to 5 or 10 TB. The problem is, If we change to a new HD (from 1 TB to 5 TB), will it Synchronization speed will be the same as before? Because I tried it and changed the target to external HD, it need more time to verify the block and syncing hardware

changing from lets say a 2016 era pc to a 2026 era pc(second hand in 2028 thus cheaper) you will notice benefits of the initial sync due to hardware efficiencies  (maybe 7hours or less)
however you wont see the benefits now if you just swapped CPU ram now(keepong blockchain backup) because you are already in the 'after initial blockchain download' stage.. so the normal daily activity of 'live' data flow to stay at blockheight is meaningless to a computer

but the initial block download being done on a 2016pc is still not bad (14 years of data in 24 hours) and with a 2026 PC will be better

all in all. most people upgrade their computers every 4-8 years normally. and for reasons outside of bitcoin. so thinking you need to specifically invest to stay up to date just because of bitcoin is a not even a thing people need to think or worry about

you only hear the FUD from idiots that cant math, and who just want to call out that bitcoin is dead, not fit, broke so they can advertise their silly subnetwork as the solution. even when their subnetworks have a heck of alot more flaws

[Sarah Azhari]

however you wont see the benefits now if you just swapped CPU ram now(keepong blockchain backup) because you are already in the 'after initial blockchain download' stage.. so the normal daily activity of 'live' data flow to stay at blockheight is meaningless to a computer

Yes after Upgrading my RAM yesterday, seem like don't meaningful changes, loading block index is the same as before, but I receive meaningful change now, I can open many applications at the same time besides bitcoin core wallet.

I always open my bitcoin core wallet in the morning and close it after the blockchain is completed. I am just curious because always received a different number of blocks left. Today is left 115 block, and yesterday is 210, I ever remember have 110 left, so why is different at the same time?.

[franky1]

I am just curious because always received a different number of blocks left. Today is left 115 block, and yesterday is 210, I ever remember have 110 left, so why is different at the same time?.

its not a hard rule of 1 block per 10 minutes
nor a hard rule of 144 blocks a day..
those hare humanised simplified implicit/implified expectations.

explicitly
the rule TRIES to average out that there should be 2016 blocks every fortnight by adjusting the difficulty. but blocks can appear at anytime.. after 1 minute or after a couple hours.. meaning some days can have 100 some can have 200
on an average day there should be about 144block

[LoyceV]

Yes after Upgrading my RAM yesterday, seem like don't meaningful changes, loading block index is the same as before

What's your current system setup? How much RAM, what kind of hard drive (HDD/SSD/internal/external), which CPU, which operating system and what internet connection do you have?

I receive meaningful change now, I can open many applications at the same time besides bitcoin core wallet.

I remember the days I switched from 4 GB to 8 GB and later to 16 GB. More RAM makes everything run faster. If only my laptop could handle more than that.

I always open my bitcoin core wallet in the morning and close it after the blockchain is completed.

If I may ask: why? If you have enough RAM now, you could just keep it running.

This picture is the reason I asked for your system setup. My laptop is ancient, and catching up on 15 hours of blocks takes less than 2 minutes. It could be less than 1 minute too, I barely notice it.

[Sarah Azhari]

Yes after Upgrading my RAM yesterday, seem like don't meaningful changes, loading block index is the same as before

What's your current system setup? How much RAM, what kind of hard drive (HDD/SSD/internal/external), which CPU, which operating system and what internet connection do you have?

bitcoin core 24.0
OS Windows 10 64 bit,
RAM 16 GB
Hard drive SSD NVME but, core wallet target on HDD internal 1 GB
CPU AMD A9
Internet connection: Wifi hotspot from phone cellular.

If I may ask: why? If you have enough RAM now, you could just keep it running.

Sometimes when the core wallet opened, my internet is a bit slow to open the forum.

This picture is the reason I asked for your system setup. My laptop is ancient, and catching up on 15 hours of blocks takes less than 2 minutes. It could be less than 1 minute too, I barely notice it.

is that time left 77 minutes make you curious?. That screen I take 2-3 minutes after opening the wallet, but I remember less than15 minute  download completed.

[LoyceV]

Hard drive SSD NVME but, core wallet target on HDD internal 1 GB TB

FTFY (I guess).
Any chance you can put your chainstate directory on the SSD? I don't know if Windows can do this, on Linux I have .bitcoin in my home directory (on SSD), and the blocks directory in there is a symlink to my HDD.

Internet connection: Wifi hotspot from phone cellular.

It could very well be this is your bottleneck now.

Sometimes when the core wallet opened, my internet is a bit slow to open the forum.

That's all the more reason to keep it running: once it's synced, it will only download ~10 MB per hour and reduce the load the next time you turn it on.

is that time left 77 minutes make you curious?. That screen I take 2-3 minutes after opening the wallet, but I remember less than15 minute  download completed.

Yes, the 77 minutes looks terrible, and 15 minutes is still long, but if your data is limited to 5 Mbit/s, it makes sense.

[BlockMinusOne]

Starting with Bitcoin can require a fair amount of storage space. Currently, the size of the Bitcoin blockchain is around 500 GB and growing. As a beginner, you'll need to allocate at least this much storage space to fully download and validate the blockchain. It's recommended to use an SSD (solid state drive) as they are faster than traditional HDDs (hard disk drives) and can make the process of downloading and synchronizing with the blockchain much quicker. If you're using a 10 TB hard drive, it should be enough for the current size of the blockchain, but keep in mind that it will continue to grow over time.

[nullama]

Starting with Bitcoin can require a fair amount of storage space. Currently, the size of the Bitcoin blockchain is around 500 GB and growing. As a beginner, you'll need to allocate at least this much storage space to fully download and validate the blockchain. It's recommended to use an SSD (solid state drive) as they are faster than traditional HDDs (hard disk drives) and can make the process of downloading and synchronizing with the blockchain much quicker. If you're using a 10 TB hard drive, it should be enough for the current size of the blockchain, but keep in mind that it will continue to grow over time.

You can always run a prunned node, that means that you do download the full 500GB and validate it, but you only keep in storage a fixed amount, say 2GB or whatever, of the latest data.

So, in reality you don't need a large disk if you simply want to run a node.

[BlockMinusOne]

You can always run a prunned node, that means that you do download the full 500GB and validate it, but you only keep in storage a fixed amount, say 2GB or whatever, of the latest data.

So, in reality you don't need a large disk if you simply want to run a node.

Running a pruned node has downsides for users. It can limit your ability to validate older transactions and blocks. In the event of a dispute, it can be more difficult to prove the validity of your transactions. Additionally, you won't be able to fully participate in the decentralized network as a fully validating node, making the network less secure.

[pawanjain]

Ideally, put at least chainstate on SSD, and use 4096 MB dbcache. With those settings, any modern computer should be able to sync the blockchain within a day. Assuming your internet connection can handle it.
1TB is enough for many years to come.

I have a good internet connection with a speed of 100 Mbps. I have a Western Digital 1.5 TB HDD which has around 40 MBps write speed.
Yet it took me a good amount of time to download the whole blockchain. I used to keep it running in the day time and shutdown by night.
It took me around 2.5 days to sync the data completely. I was running it on a raspberry pi 400 due to which I think it took time.
May be a better configuration PC would have downloaded the data faster.

Talking about SSD, what I have heard is that it won't matter much if you have HDD or SSD because the internet download speed and system configuration will restrict the speed of downloading the blockchain data.
So I thought it would be better to use a HDD instead and save cost on it.

[LoyceV]

I have a good internet connection with a speed of 100 Mbps. I have a Western Digital 1.5 TB HDD which has around 40 MBps write speed.
Yet it took me a good amount of time to download the whole blockchain. I used to keep it running in the day time and shutdown by night.
It took me around 2.5 days to sync the data completely. I was running it on a raspberry pi 400 due to which I think it took time.

With a Pi, I expect the limited RAM and CPU to be the bottleneck.

Talking about SSD, what I have heard is that it won't matter much if you have HDD or SSD because the internet download speed and system configuration will restrict the speed of downloading the blockchain data.
So I thought it would be better to use a HDD instead and save cost on it.

RAM and SSD can (more or less) replace each other's function when syncing Bitcoin Core. With enough RAM, you can increase dbcache and don't need to read/write large amounts of data for chainstate. If you don't have enough RAM, an SSD significantly improves syncing time. If you have both, it's still the best. For what it's worth: my blocks directory is still on HDD, but if I ever buy a 2 TB SSD, I'll use that. It also improves performance when importing for instance an old private key.

Could you provide example of "In the event of a dispute"?

You're talking to a chat bot spammer.

[Sarah Azhari]

Starting with Bitcoin can require a fair amount of storage space. Currently, the size of the Bitcoin blockchain is around 500 GB and growing. As a beginner, you'll need to allocate at least this much storage space to fully download and validate the blockchain. It's recommended to use an SSD (solid state drive) as they are faster than traditional HDDs (hard disk drives) and can make the process of downloading and synchronizing with the blockchain much quicker. If you're using a 10 TB hard drive, it should be enough for the current size of the blockchain, but keep in mind that it will continue to grow over time.

This was what we are discussion before, SSD or HDD is just storage where that function is only effective at the beginning. After download and initial complete, SSD is just storage whose function is not far away the same as HDD. So, SSD just spends your money if the core wallet function is just downloading the blockchain and running it. And, if you were bought SSD and want to upgrade, better to make that SSD as bootable OS and HDD inside and change it as bitcoin core wallet storage, this is what I do now