{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Thomas Voegtlin \u003cthomasv1 at gmx.de\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Le 09/04/2014 17:54, Gregory Maxwell a écrit :\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e Sadly today Electrum requires more than a full node, it requires a\n\u003e \u003e number of large additional indexes over what a full node has and\n\u003e \u003e pruning is precluded. I don't think that increasing the resource\n\u003e \u003e utilization of the node is a good way to go there for the purposes\n\u003e \u003e expressed here. (not that electrum couldn't be used here, but not\n\u003e \u003e unmodified without the resource usage increasing route)\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Electrum uses two large indexes:\n\u003e\n\u003e      address -\u003e utxo\n\u003e\n\u003e (patricia tree, aka \"ultimate blockchain compression\", see thread\n\u003e started by Alan Reiner in the bitcointalk forum)\n\u003e\n\nThanks for the explanation.\n\nAdding a RPC call for a \"address -\u003e utxo\" query wouldn't be a big deal. It\nhas been requested before for other purposes as well, all the better if it\nhelps for interaction with Electrum.\n\nSpent history would be involve a much larger index, and it's not likely\nthat will end up in bitcoin\n\nWladimir\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/4cf070b4/attachment.html\u003e"}