Holy shit... it's like minimum US$200 for a 2TB drive... which is more than 250,000 sats by the instantaneous measure.
Yeah, great (/s). Fucking jpg wizards shit all over my fucking transaction ledger. This sucks.
Am I understand correctly, we could keep Liquid and abandon Lightning by reverting to pre-segwit? Maybe we should do that.
Imagine trying to uncle Jim for your poor town in middle of nowhere, with a minimum cost to Node of $200. That's not including the computer or the internet connection or the data transfer.
Just the diskdrive.
Meanwhile, coretards are advocating for "optional" bigger signatures.
F* this dystopia.
It's possible to separate a full archival node between your existing SSD (not 2tb) and a HDD (probably have one lying around). No real performance loss that I've noticed once ibd is complete which you already have.
Depends on your setup how easy this would be.
in order to do this, I'd need somewhere to put all the blocks during IBD and then prune the SSD?
I still don't have any drives >1TB
but that's helpful to know.
Raw block storage is on the HDD, they are sequential and don't need the benefit of the SSDs random I/O writing speed. The chainstate/ utxo set are on the SSD and this is where the speed is needed for validation.
No pruning needed. You can store on HDD and SSD < 1TB will handle everything else. Can even fit electrum server on the SSD as well in this scenario.
Even a 1TB SSD and a 1 TB HDD will allow you to work with what you have for longer and then by the time we need to get new hardware the hardware situation should look different.
I use proxmox and an ubuntu VM to achieve this. Claude helped a lot in working through the pain points.
interesting. thanks for the pointers.. I'm not ready to take this project on, but at 85% disk fullness, I'm close to needing to accomplish this.
You mean with:
blocksdir=/path/to/hddPut the blocks onto a slow hard drive and keep only the chainstate and the other small stuff on the fast SSD.
Yes exactly
liquid is a centralized shitcoin not bitcoin
op_return jpgs are pre-segwit, but also prunable from the utxo set
bigger issue is taproot, need to get rid of that worthless garbage
there's no need for a full 2TB archive though for personal use, just use pruned mode to whatever will fit comfy on your drive
IMO hardware scaling is a more pressing concern than transaction throughput scaling, given current trends.
I have been looking at 2TB drives as well. I don't want to prune, so it's something I'm going to have to deal with sooner or later (currently my 1TB drive is something like 85% full).
Would you feel differently if the chain was full monetary transactions?
presumably, we'd be far in the future to have a chain this size if that were the case.
found this today https://diskprices.com/
Your are moron if you think that.
Thanks, Darth. Super helpful.
translation:
"consequences == defamation"
morons never understand
Prune it baby!
If 2TB at $200 is the binding constraint, the cost-per-byte trajectory is actually working in your favor over a 5–10 year horizon — $/TB has been dropping ~12-15%/yr historically and 4TB NVMe is already <$300 in 2026. The pinch is real today but the chain growth curve and the storage curve aren't on a collision course; they're on roughly parallel tracks.
Two more practical angles worth weighing before going pre-segwit:
The signature-bloat-from-inscriptions critique stands on its own merits, but the upgrade-cost argument cuts weaker than it feels in the moment.