1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WsOZW-00024D-Gs
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 05 Jun 2014 03:42:34 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.181; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f181.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com ([209.85.214.181])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WsOZV-0005b2-Hu
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 05 Jun 2014 03:42:34 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id wm4so470309obc.40
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:42:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.134.175 with SMTP id pl15mr27488319oeb.81.1401939747955;
Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.71.162 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 20:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <34798C1C-FDA7-4A4C-B136-DBD4E59C254D@ricmoo.com>
References: <34798C1C-FDA7-4A4C-B136-DBD4E59C254D@ricmoo.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 11:42:27 +0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ptRZ-48sM_sGQEVQ0lSOX_m9iFY
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1vVY1jnV8Kdg5OWEt=Rba2PPcs3ke4tMWc6fS4wGPpOw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Richard Moore <me@ricmoo.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b41ce12ac6d3e04fb0e880f
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WsOZV-0005b2-Hu
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Future Feature Proposal - getgist
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 03:42:34 -0000
--047d7b41ce12ac6d3e04fb0e880f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Why do you want to optimise this? getheaders is used by SPV clients not
full nodes. SPV clients like bitcoinj can and do simply ship with gist
files in them, then getheaders from the last "checkpoint" (I wish I
hadn't reused terminology like that but this is what bitcoinj calls them).
In practice when I look at performance issues with current SPV clients,
getheaders speed is not on my radar.
--047d7b41ce12ac6d3e04fb0e880f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Why do you want to optimise this? getheaders is used by SP=
V clients not full nodes. SPV clients like bitcoinj can and do simply ship =
with gist files in them, then getheaders from the last "checkpoint&quo=
t; =C2=A0 (I wish I hadn't reused terminology like that but this is wha=
t bitcoinj calls them).<div>
<br></div><div>In practice when I look at performance issues with current S=
PV clients, getheaders speed is not on my radar.</div></div>
--047d7b41ce12ac6d3e04fb0e880f--
|
