{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0n","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0n","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-10-29\n📝 Original message:On Thursday, October 29, 2015 6:57:39 AM telemaco via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Why not allow two options:\n\u003e \n\u003e 1/ a default RocksDB/SQLite/LevelDB (whatever is decided)\n\u003e 2/ alternative provide instructions for connection to any other rdbms\n\u003e using odbc or jdbc.\n\nI predict this would be a disaster. UTXO storage is CONSENSUS-CRITICAL code.\nAny divergence in implementation behaviour, including bugs AND bugfixes, may \ncause consensus failure. For this to have a reasonable *hope* of working, we \nneed to choose one storage engine, and *will* need to maintain consensus-\ncompatibility of it ourselves (since nobody else cares).\n\nFixing LevelDB frankly seems like an easier task than switching to anything \nSQL-based, which would require a *lot* more *difficult-to-get-consensus-\ncompatible* code that we are all (or at least mostly) very unfamiliar with.\n\nResearch is fine, but let's be realistic about deployment.\n\nLuke"}