reply on: Core & Knots aren't the only choices \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

447 sats \ 9 replies \ @justin_shocknet 4 Sep \ on: Core & Knots aren't the only choices bitcoin

I wouldn't call BTCD obscure, literally every LND node uses its walletkit, which makes it a considerable number of economic nodes

There was one bug exploited by one of the Ark scammers that caused instances to crash a few years ago, but otherwise it's been pretty stable... Maintained by folks at Lightning Labs

There's just not much software around it, I've never ventured to see what it would take to power a mempool visualizer etc with it

I primarily run it for serving block filters

28 sats \ 5 replies \ @siggy47 OP 4 Sep

I wasn't specifically referring to BTCD as obscure. A few of the other implementations are only run by one node.

93 sats \ 3 replies \ @optimism 4 Sep

Bitcore -> nodejs client originally made by bitpay, still maintained
bcoin -> another nodejs client, not-so-maintained anymore
Bitcoin Unlimited -> very old - this is now a hardfork
Bitcoin Classic -> hardfork

not sure:

Bitcoin UASF -> I think this is the BIP-148 client, but tbh this was a long time ago
TRB -> this looks very, very odd.

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 OP 4 Sep

Thanks for this. They're all new to me.

36 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 4 Sep

None of these in that list are what you'd look to replace Core(-derived) with. btcd is currently by far the safest bet, but I've myself not ran it for 3 years now, so my experience is outdated.

117 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 4 Sep

to mention also https://libbitcoin.info

36 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 16h

how can you vote for a third party?

53 sats \ 0 replies \ @BlokchainB 4 Sep

Ark scammers hahahahahaha

17 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 4 Sep

I've tested once BTCD, back few years ago. But was using quite a lot of resources of that machine. Maybe was my fault not doing something well... idk. Is it better nowadays?

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 4 Sep

I've got both core and btcd running on one box and they seem to take about the same resources

btcd  CPU(raw): 64.6%   CPU(machine-share): 1.3%   Cores used: 0.65
bitcoind  CPU(raw): 56.9%   CPU(machine-share): 1.2%   Cores used: 0.57

Only the btcd one is public facing though, its serving block filters to neutrino clients with a high connection cap and is pretty well known, usually pumping out 20+mbps... given that, it's pretty efficient

There were some performance fixes last year iirc but I think they were mostly related to initial sync/verification