BitShares Forum
Main => Technical Support => Topic started by: karnal on May 18, 2015, 09:51:52 pm
-
Greetings,
I am wondering if anyone who is presently running a node could comment on disk space requirements / CPU% usage / used memory when running bitshares continuously.
For a knowledgeable developer, I would also like to ask how much was the code written with portability in mind - will it run easily on BSD and Solaris?
-
Hi karnal, I have paged a couple of the Tech Support people (cass and pc) for this one.
Hang in there, thanx :)
-ken
-
I am wondering if anyone who is presently running a node could comment on disk space requirements / CPU% usage / used memory when running bitshares continuously.
(http://i.imgur.com/uaALezy.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/eVhHSTP.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/eUG6suJ.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/Lrwl7nb.png)
-
To just run the node is actually reasonably light once the chain has synchronized and indexed. I understand they are revamping the database so the information below is likely to change in the near future.
From my delegate VPS:
Digital Ocean:
- 2GB Ram
- 40GB SSD Disk
- Ubuntu 14.04 x64
top - 06:05:13 up 18 days, 15:27, 1 user, load average: 0.23, 0.21, 0.24
Tasks: 108 total, 2 running, 106 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 2.0 us, 0.8 sy, 0.0 ni, 96.3 id, 0.8 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st
KiB Mem: 2049960 total, 1974308 used, 75652 free, 1616 buffers
KiB Swap: 4194300 total, 95856 used, 4098444 free. 809236 cached Mem
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
24279 james 20 0 2705916 1.012g 47856 S 5.0 51.8 104:49.35 bts_0.9.2
Disk Space used by .BitShares folder: 3.5GB
The memory and CPU usage can both spike up to nearly 100% but is typically much lower than that; especially if you deny incoming connections.
-
I am wondering if anyone who is presently running a node could comment on disk space requirements / CPU% usage / used memory when running bitshares continuously.
Disk usage on my client is currently at ~3.3G. CPU usage is high while syncing, but very low when running continuously. RAM is hard to tell, you should allow 1G for the CLI client.
For a knowledgeable developer, I would also like to ask how much was the code written with portability in mind - will it run easily on BSD and Solaris?
Well, the code compiles on Windows, OS-X and Linux, so portability is certainly a goal. Generally, the code is C++11, which means you need a recent compiler (but not too recent, see https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/issues/1540 ). You also need recent libraries (most importantly boost, and qt-5 for the GUI client).
-
Cool guys, this is exactly the info I was looking for.
And thanks Ken for summoning the right people :)
One last question related to this, if you're not aiming for paid delegate position, is there any benefit to the network from running under-101 delegates?
I realize that these wouldn't sign blocks, but do they help with client syncing? Any other functions they would have?
-
One last question related to this, if you're not aiming for paid delegate position, is there any benefit to the network from running under-101 delegates?
I realize that these wouldn't sign blocks, but do they help with client syncing? Any other functions they would have?
A stable node with high uptime and static IP address would help a little, yes. But not so much that you should dedicate a machine to it.
-
Interesting. Thanks for clearing that up pc.
-
If you are extra generous you can run a full-node chain server to help with fast syncing
-
If you are extra generous you can run a full-node chain server to help with fast syncing
Please elaborate ? I would be very interested to know more.
Is there an up-to-date wiki/article about node types in BitShares?
-
Please elaborate ? I would be very interested to know more.
Is there an up-to-date wiki/article about node types in BitShares?
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/BitShares/Chain-Server
and
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/wiki/Using-Chain-Servers
-
xeroc, I lost this thread in the mean time.
I have looked into chain servers, nice concept but there seem to be some up already and since it needs manual editing of the config file, I suppose >95% users are not using them now.
I'll revisit the idea of running one if their discovery by clients becomes automatic.