Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge and replace deprecated steemd with PostgreSQL or similar #3620

Open
pfunks opened this issue Mar 3, 2020 · 6 comments
Open

Merge and replace deprecated steemd with PostgreSQL or similar #3620

pfunks opened this issue Mar 3, 2020 · 6 comments

Comments

@pfunks
Copy link

pfunks commented Mar 3, 2020

There are superior databases to use for a centralized content database and ledger. steemd is woefully inefficient for this purpose. It is a waste of resources to run a centralized database on software meant for a decentralized network.

@mtastafford
Copy link

This would really trim a lot of the fat off of the project. I suggest we remove all the code related to witness voting as well, seeing as how it's obviously a waste of time.

Couple kb saved, but that's money in the pocket!

@VIM-Arcange
Copy link
Contributor

We should really consider .txt files. It's way more easy to edit, rename or delete.
That will definitely help to get rid of the redundant information stored in the blockchain, you know this immutability and censorship-free thing nobody cares about.
IMHO, this is the best way to reduce the current blockchain size and speed up replays!

@CADawg
Copy link

CADawg commented Mar 3, 2020

Wow. I love how innovative you guys are. We could be the next OneCoin!

@4miners
Copy link

4miners commented Mar 3, 2020

Why not just delete the repository? You will not need it anyway after move to TRON... 🤔

@prcolaco
Copy link

prcolaco commented Mar 3, 2020

This way, using postgresql we could remove all the plugins as well and implement them as stored procedures! so much easier to maintain and easier to deploy as well, as the database would just serve the code as well and the nodes would just be there for the sake of decentralization, oops, or better, redundancy...

@officiallymarky
Copy link

I'm all for it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants