Re: Official FutureBit Apollo BTC Software/Image and Support thread
I'd honestly buy a 1TB drive and call it a day. Deleting stuff here and there will just cause you issues in the long run and there's not much to be deleted, anyway. Most of that storage is just blockchain. If you start pruning it, you can basically forget about running Lightning later down the road when they add a Lightning app.
Oh, that's interesting, so pruning to about 500 GB (cutting out oldest 2009-10 blocks), or whatever is the number to keep node running in a month time when it runs out.. Does that cause LN nodes to fail immediately? All LN implementations have this issue?You can apparently do it with LND, but it's going to be more resource-intensive. Keep in mind that LND is already much more resource-intensive than Core Lightning, so I'd always go for the latter on such embedded low-power systems.
According to the documentation:
Quote from: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/INSTALL.md#available-backend-operating-modes
Note that since version 0.13 pruned nodes are supported although they cause performance penalty and higher network usage.
The lightning daemon will poll bitcoind for new blocks that it hasn't processed yet, thus synchronizing itself with bitcoind. If bitcoind prunes a block that Core Lightning has not processed yet, e.g., Core Lightning was not running for a prolonged period, then bitcoind will not be able to serve the missing blocks, hence Core Lightning will not be able to synchronize anymore and will be stuck. In order to avoid this situation you should be monitoring the gap between Core Lightning's blockheight using lightning-cli getinfo and bitcoind's blockheight using bitcoin-cli getblockchaininfo. If the two blockheights drift apart it might be necessary to intervene.
This needs to be addressed.
I think it should be addressed by telling them to get a 1TB m.2 drive, which today are dirt-cheap.. 