pull down to refresh
1 sat \ 5 replies \ @gd OP 22 Sep 2022 \ parent \ on: Cloud-hosted Bitcoin Node: What is most important to you? bitcoin
These follow my assumptions pretty closely. A large premise for my question was based on the offerings from Voltage, with no dedicated "full node" until the $200/month tier.
My core assumption is that a full node is preferable, but I wonder if some research from the community might suggest otherwise.
All depends what are you looking to achieve with that node.
Voltage is ok offering for tiers of use.
A full node with a big SSD drive is more for users that really need that full node in public or also for their private use.
Nowadays you can have just a full bitcoin node in the cloud and sync your mobile LN nodes towards to it. And is working just fine.
reply
I would certainly be interested in which of those two options you'd prefer if you were looking to buy a cloud node subscription.
reply
Need more details about that "shared blockchain".
Could be:
- a powerful NAS in the same datacenter that ONLY offers a shared repository for direct access to read the BTC blockchain.
- a BTC node in the same datacenter that provide LAN sync to other nodes in the same datacenter
- a local shared folder from where node operators could copy the data and don't wait for sync
On all situations, you will need to trust the source as being the real BTC and not a forked shit. But I supposed this could be verified easily and/or offer a verification tool to users.
reply
I imagine either something like a pruned node or neutrino would be the most likely alternative to a full node. LAN-based syncs would also be possible, but I guess in this specific scenario, it wouldn't solve block storage costs.
reply
indeed. Neutrino is also a good solution.
reply