This is great, but I think saying 'catching up a few months takes an hour when on mobile' is a bit misleading I think. When I scan 1 year worth of transactions it takes me about ~5 minutes on my phone (doing 'local' scanning with Dana). Admittedly we use spent filtering, but that is described in the BIP too so I don't think it's unrealistic to compare it against that benchmark. '5 minutes' isn't *seconds*, but it isn't *hours* either.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
I measured the scanning performance on Cake, and estimated 2 years of scanning would take around 9 hours.
Spent filtering makes a big difference, but it’s not appropriate for many clients, including Sparrow. Also the BIP approach requires non trivial data download which means making assumptions about bandwidth.
That said there are use cases for the BIP approach, and I’m glad Dana is working on them!