Timeline for Why isn't there more concern of Ethereum reaching 1TB? Should we be worried?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 26, 2018 at 20:16 | history | edited | eth♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Formatting
|
| S May 26, 2018 at 20:16 | history | suggested | Vignesh Karthikeyan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Formatting
|
| May 25, 2018 at 19:41 | vote | accept | Vignesh Karthikeyan | ||
| May 25, 2018 at 19:19 | comment | added | Vignesh Karthikeyan | Ah I didn't even know that. I assumed wrongly they were very important like bitcoin's were. Appreciate the answer. | |
| May 25, 2018 at 19:17 | comment | added | CPereez19 | Yep, the positive aspects of using light clients is that you can verify transactions too because you have strategic data and tree hashes that allow you to proof the correctness without having all of the info. With all of the answer i don't want to say that full nodes are not necessary, THEY ARE. But not all the nodes have to store the 1TB full. | |
| May 25, 2018 at 19:03 | comment | added | Vignesh Karthikeyan | Would my understanding be correct in asking that if a light node needs to verify a transaction, it can simply download what it requires to do so (independent of a full node) and verify the transaction itself(i.e., different from that of bitcoin's?). | |
| May 25, 2018 at 18:55 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 26, 2018 at 20:16 | |||||
| May 25, 2018 at 18:49 | history | answered | CPereez19 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |