On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Peter R <pete...@gmx.com> wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Like you said, the issue with using more than one database technology is not > that one node would prove that Block X is valid while the another node proves > that Block X is NOT valid. Instead, the problem is that one node might say > “valid” while the other node says “I don’t know.”
Sometimes errors are such that you can catch them (if you're super vigilant and know an error is even possible in that case)-- and indeed, in that case you can get a "I don't know, something is wrong.", other times errors are undetectable. > In reality, this fear is largely unfounded. I cited an issue in leveldb (before we used it) where it would silently fail to return records. > If the software was written with the philosophy that tracking consensus was > more important than bug-for-bug compatibility, it would have returned an > exception rather than “invalid.” That invariant requires the software to be completely free of errors that would violate it. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
