Pruned Node - Decrease size

[apogio]

I wanted to make sure it's safe, before trying it.

I have a 128GB SSD, that I use to run a pruned node, which is currently pruning at 90GB.

I wanted to know if it's possible to decrease the size to 60GB.

The ways to do it should be straightforward, either:

1. using the GUI, going to Settings -> Options -> changing the "Prune block storage to <size> GB"
2. changing the prune attribute in bitcoin.conf file.

The node must be stopped of course.

The question is, is it safe? I didn't want to just try it and possibly create a mess.

[LoyceV]

That should be fine. If you don't mind me asking: why so much? The only reason is to be able to sync wallets that are a several months old. If you don't do that, you can just as well use the minimum (550 MB).

[apogio]

That should be fine. If you don't mind me asking: why so much? The only reason is to be able to sync wallets that are a several months old. If you don't do that, you can just as well use the minimum (550 MB).

I don't mind, of course.
I just thought that since I won't use the disk for anything else, it's kind of overkill to leave 120GB unused.
Now, I want to reduce the size because I wanna run a monero node as well on the same disk.

[LoyceV]

I wanna run a monero node as well on the same disk.

In 2022, a pruned Monero took about 50 GB. It's more now.
Did you know a Monero node is much more demanding than Bitcoin Core? It may take a while to sync.

[apogio]

I wanna run a monero node as well on the same disk.

In 2022, a pruned Monero took about 50 GB. It's more now.
Did you know a Monero node is much more demanding than Bitcoin Core? It may take a while to sync.

I didn’t know about the pruned monero node size, thanks!
I do already run a full monero node and full bitcoin node on my raspberry pi.
I ve done a tutorial for the forum as well in case anybody is interested. ^[1]
I have experienced long delays and also some bandwidth issues with the monero node so I know!

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5480371.msg63439224#msg63439224

[MysteryMiner]

I just thought that since I won't use the disk for anything else, it's kind of overkill to leave 120GB unused.

SSD needs free space for TRIM and wear-leveling algorithms to work better. Having little free space left on SSD means all writes and wear leveling is going to mostly happen in that free space. So it is either full node or pruned node to like 2GB.

[hd49728]

I wanted to know if it's possible to decrease the size to 60GB.

The node must be stopped of course.

Your node won't be stopped, it will continue, but it will stop storing Bitcoin blocks with maximize size of 90GB like before setting, and will reduce its storage to 60GB. It scroll toward more new blocks and store less past blocks than before.

I didn't experience that when I reconfigure storage size for my Bitcoin full node, with Bitcoin Core, the node will stop working.

The question is, is it safe? I didn't want to just try it and possibly create a mess.

As I know, it's safe. Prune node can be used with smaller storage size and your wanted size like 90GB or 60GB is too big for a prune node.

[pooya87]

I just thought that since I won't use the disk for anything else, it's kind of overkill to leave 120GB unused.

I do already run a full monero node and full bitcoin node on my raspberry pi.

In case you are running all these different nodes on different devices to help the network, it is worth knowing that from the perspective of the rest of the network it does not matter if your "pruned" node is storing 288 blocks (the minimum 550 MB limit) or 60 GB or 120 GB, etc. because your node will advertise itself as NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED and the assumption by all peers is that it only stores the last 288 blocks.
In other words your pruned node storing 60 GB of historical blocks will not help the rest of the network sync any more than if it were storing 288 blocks.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0159.mediawiki

[apogio]

In case you are running all these different nodes on different devices to help the network, it is worth knowing that from the perspective of the rest of the network it does not matter if your "pruned" node is storing 288 blocks (the minimum 550 MB limit) or 60 GB or 120 GB, etc. because your node will advertise itself as NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED and the assumption by all peers is that it only stores the last 288 blocks.
In other words your pruned node storing 60 GB of historical blocks will not help the rest of the network sync any more than if it were storing 288 blocks.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0159.mediawiki

I am mainly using my pruned node as a portable wallet between some laptops I have in different places, whereas I use my full node to help the network, indeed.
Having seen your responses, I think perhaps going down to 1-2 GB is a good option, since my purpose is to use it as a wallet only.
What would you do if you were me?

[LoyceV]

I am mainly using my pruned node as a portable wallet between some laptops I have in different places
~
What would you do if you were me?

If this is a wallet running on an external drive, I wouldn't connect it to different systems. Each additional system increases the risk of getting compromised. If it's running on a laptop that you bring, you don't have this risk.
Assuming you bring a drive holding your wallet: this seems like a good use case for a hardware wallet: install the software on each different laptop, bring the hardware wallet.

I think perhaps going down to 1-2 GB is a good option

If we ever see a chain reorg larger than that, Bitcoin has bigger problems than your wallet. So it's completely fine.

[ABCbits]

--snip--

I am mainly using my pruned node as a portable wallet between some laptops I have in different places, whereas I use my full node to help the network, indeed.
Having seen your responses, I think perhaps going down to 1-2 GB is a good option, since my purpose is to use it as a wallet only.
What would you do if you were me?

As long as you never close any wallet file you've opened, reducing total size of stored block shouldn't pose any problem. And FYI, low free SSD storage space may reduce SSD write/read performance.

[apogio]

If this is a wallet running on an external drive, I wouldn't connect it to different systems. Each additional system increases the risk of getting compromised. If it's running on a laptop that you bring, you don't have this risk.
Assuming you bring a drive holding your wallet: this seems like a good use case for a hardware wallet: install the software on each different laptop, bring the hardware wallet.

I have some hardware wallets that I normally use from software connected to my full node (electrum / sparrow).

In the afforementioned case though, I treat Bitcoin Core as a hot software wallet and I am fine with that. I do it mainly for privacy / trust reasons. I could, for example install a portable version of electrum on a thumbdrive and be absolutely ok with it, couldn't I?

So, If I needed Bitcoin Core as a software wallet, I should just have it installed on my 2 laptops and not carry the data in my SSD, is this right?

As long as you never close any wallet file you've opened, reducing total size of stored block shouldn't pose any problem. And FYI, low free SSD storage space may reduce SSD write/read performance.

Good to know, thanks.

[LoyceV]

I could, for example install a portable version of electrum on a thumbdrive and be absolutely ok with it, couldn't I?

Electrum is only safe if the host system is safe. So each new host system you run the same wallet on, increases the risk.

If I needed Bitcoin Core as a software wallet, I should just have it installed on my 2 laptops and not carry the data in my SSD, is this right?

That would work. But if they're not on all the time, having to sync before you can make a payment would be annoying. Besides, if you use the same wallet on both, you're still doubling the risk. That's not necessarily that bad: doubling a very small risk is still a very small risk. I just don't like increasing risks

[apogio]

That would work. But if they're not on all the time, having to sync before you can make a payment would be annoying. Besides, if you use the same wallet on both, you're still doubling the risk. That's not necessarily that bad: doubling a very small risk is still a very small risk. I just don't like increasing risks

Got it, but what would you do? How would you approach the following requirements?

1. portable wallet.
2. securing as much privacy / trust as possible.
3. not a mobile wallet.
4. need to use it in 2 different laptops, that I own and that I 've made sure they are as safe as they can be. I am very careful with my computers, but obviously securing the digital life is never 100% certain.

[LoyceV]

How would you approach the following requirements?

1. portable wallet.
2. securing as much privacy / trust as possible.
3. not a mobile wallet.
4. need to use it in 2 different laptops, that I own and that I 've made sure they are as safe as they can be. I am very careful with my computers, but obviously securing the digital life is never 100% certain.

Privacy makes me thing of 2 things: Tor and coin control. Unstoppable Wallet can do this, but the server will still know which addresses belong to the same wallet and you don't want a mobile wallet. I wouldn't carry a hardware wallet, so I'm not going to recommend that either.
I do like just bringing a cheap disposable encrypted laptop, but if you're talking abuot 2 different laptops already, adding a third isn't very practical.
Questions:

• Do you really need to use the same wallet on both laptops? If not, each laptop could have it's own wallet with it's own balance.
• Are we talking about a large balance, or just daily spending money? If it's the latter, I'd just do what's most convenient.

[apogio]

Do you really need to use the same wallet on both laptops? If each laptop could have it's own wallet with it's own balance.

Probably not, I just found it convenient to move around using the same wallet on an SSD.
I could, theoretically, just run Bitcoin Core on both laptops and have the data stored twice. Once in each laptop's disk.

Are we talking about a large balance, or just daily spending money? If it's the latter, I'd just do what's most convenient.

I never keep large balances on devices that connect to the internet. Since Bitcoin Core is a hot wallet, I don't store large amounts in Bitcoin Core wallets.

I only keep daily spending amounts in the wallet, or, like people enjoy saying "I keep the same amounts I would put in my pocket wallet in cash".

In fact, I am using this wallet for a very specific reason that I 'd rather not disclose. But the amount is trivial.

[LoyceV]

I never keep large balances on devices that connect to the internet. Since Bitcoin Core is a hot wallet, I don't store large amounts in Bitcoin Core wallets.

In that case, I'd just do whatever is most convenient

In fact, I am using this wallet for a very specific reason that I 'd rather not disclose.

How to make me curious

But the amount is trivial.

Here's an alternative: use Feather with Monero, and use an instant exchanger each time you need to make a small Bitcoin payment.

[apogio]

How to make me curious

Curiosity killed the cat fox.
You 'd be surprised if I told you... (or not  )

Here's an alternative: use Feather with Monero, and use an instant exchanger each time you need to make a small Bitcoin payment.

I am already making exchanges between monero and btc but never thought about it this way. I am doing arbitrary exchanges so far, without a specific reason, but I will consider this as an option.

[NotATether]

You want to make sure that for whatever reason you will not need to read the block data itself for any purpose before you prune the blockchain.

Because if you do need it sometime in the future, then you have to download the chain again.

It's an uncommon case and probably doesn't pertain to you, but it's important to bitcoin application developers.

[LoyceV]

Because if you do need it sometime in the future, then you have to download the chain again.

That happened to me several times already over the years. If at all possible: add a cheap 1 TB HDD, mount it as blocks directory.