Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2011-09-06 🗒️ Summary of this message: The author is ...
📅 Original date posted:2011-09-06
🗒️ Summary of this message: The author is looking for a useful project to work on and suggests writing a proxy to reduce strain on Bitcoind. Patches to BitCoinJ are also welcome.
📝 Original message:>
> I've looked but can't find a post like you're talking about. Can you point
> me to it?
>
https://groups.google.com/forum/?pli=1#!topic/bitcoinj/LSlZdUWcCdk
> If so then bollocks... I'm looking for something useful to do atm.
> PoolServerJ is in a holding pattern atm as I've stabilisied all the bugs I
> know about and am waiting for several pools to finish testing and move into
> production so I'm twiddling thumbs trying to figure out how to spend my
> time.
>
Patches to BitCoinJ are always welcome :-)
If you'd rather do your own thing, you could experiment with writing a proxy
that sits in front of bitcoind and multiplexes connections. Gavin is
concerned about socket exhaustion as users move to lightweight clients.
Multiplexing proxies are a battle-tested technique for reducing the strain
of this type of thing. BitCoinJ uses thread-per-connection so wouldn't do a
good job of that right now, but allowing it to use a mix of async io and
multi-threading would be a nice improvement. It'd need some changes to
bitcoind as well for a really good effort, to allow for IPs to be forwarded.
I'm happy to discuss it more with you over on the bitcoinj list if wanted.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110906/1c52c3de/attachment.html>;
🗒️ Summary of this message: The author is looking for a useful project to work on and suggests writing a proxy to reduce strain on Bitcoind. Patches to BitCoinJ are also welcome.
📝 Original message:>
> I've looked but can't find a post like you're talking about. Can you point
> me to it?
>
https://groups.google.com/forum/?pli=1#!topic/bitcoinj/LSlZdUWcCdk
> If so then bollocks... I'm looking for something useful to do atm.
> PoolServerJ is in a holding pattern atm as I've stabilisied all the bugs I
> know about and am waiting for several pools to finish testing and move into
> production so I'm twiddling thumbs trying to figure out how to spend my
> time.
>
Patches to BitCoinJ are always welcome :-)
If you'd rather do your own thing, you could experiment with writing a proxy
that sits in front of bitcoind and multiplexes connections. Gavin is
concerned about socket exhaustion as users move to lightweight clients.
Multiplexing proxies are a battle-tested technique for reducing the strain
of this type of thing. BitCoinJ uses thread-per-connection so wouldn't do a
good job of that right now, but allowing it to use a mix of async io and
multi-threading would be a nice improvement. It'd need some changes to
bitcoind as well for a really good effort, to allow for IPs to be forwarded.
I'm happy to discuss it more with you over on the bitcoinj list if wanted.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110906/1c52c3de/attachment.html>;