On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 06:38:23PM +0800, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >
> > As I explained in the email you're replying to and didn't quote, bloom
> > filters has O(n) cost per query, so sending different bloom filters to
> > different peers for privacy reasons costs the network significant disk
> > IO res
Most of this description of disk activity is true, but it omits one
key point: Total cached data (working set). It is a binary, first
order question: are you hitting pagecache, or the disk? When nodes
act as archival data sources, the pagecache pressure is immense. When
nodes just primarily se
I believe that the Payment Protocol works that way, the merchant broadcast
the Tx.
El 10/06/2014 13:23, "Chris D'Costa" escribió:
> I wonder if Raul is mistakenly under the impression that the transaction
> only reaches the Bitcoin network via Alice? In which case the premise of
> this "attack" i
>
> A NODE_BLOOM service bit is a very reasonable
> and simple way to do exactly that, and is defacto what implementations
> that don't support bloom filters do anyway.
>
BTW, I find it curious that any nodes have code to disconnect peers that
send Bloom filters. It shouldn't be necessary. Bitcoi
>
> As I explained in the email you're replying to and didn't quote, bloom
> filters has O(n) cost per query, so sending different bloom filters to
> different peers for privacy reasons costs the network significant disk
> IO resources. If I were to actually implement it it'd look like a DoS
> atta
Hello,
This Friday I tagged 0.9.2rc2, with the following changes compared to 0.9.2rc1:
- #4282: cwallet init fix
- #4295: upgrade OpenSSL to 1.0.1h
- #4261: Use pnode->nLastRecv as sync score
We still need more gitian builds - I'd like to do the 0.9.2 final
release end of this week as I haven't
6 matches
Mail list logo
