Right now, the network size is the smallest I’ve seen in months… 31.xxx EiB. What should be the take away from this? Is this a signal?
It’s just an estimate that can fluctuate, I don’t think people have unplugged their drives.
Could it not be linked to this info ?
Like 10% of the netspace is forked and not farming the right chain ?
Just a question !
Ppl are having issues staying synced due to the spam attack.
I’d guess no more than that.
1 Like
You can read the Chia update in the following link about the Dust Storm:
Update from Chia on the Dust Storm · Discussion #9049 · Chia-Network/chia-blockchain · GitHub
1 Like
Thanks for sharing 
I think a higher than usual percenatage are suffering from upgrade problems and are not synced as well.
I have not upgraded yet. It may just be the silly attack, but this upgrade may also be shaky.
I’m doing a clean install of .10 so far so good.
Moved db over , I’ll keep ya posted.
1 Like
If you have a node up and running, leave it in that state. The dead weight connections upstream from the dust attack are affecting people that restart or just get started for the first time. The .10 update timeline also made for this to be an opportune time for them to launch the dust attack.
The storm is over, so calling those nodes “dead weight” is possibly not the best thing to do. If those nodes will catch up right now, that will just benefit the whole network. Also, those nodes are just one/two days behind, so should not take them that much to catch up.
Lastly, we can agree that some boxes may be just too old. However, how many 15 years old laptops are out there? Mine died after 5 years or so. Also, Chia was promoting RPis from day one. Right now, they are trying to say that it is those people fault to run chia on RPis. I guess, this is the time where Flex pool client shines.
If you think about why those computers have problems, we can clearly identify two issues. First is that for whatever reason (CPU, HD) they cannot handle blockchain db updates (thus are behind with everything else, including syncing). The second is that they put strain on their peers. If you think about the second one (strain on their peers), it should be obvious that when you fall behind, you ask for less data, so they should not be putting that strain. The only explanation for that (for me) is that the process that grabs the network data is still running fast, and when it tries to pass that data to the process that updates the blockchain db, that process is not ready, as such the new data is dropped on the floor, and the network process is asking for the same data again. That is (IMO) the only explanation how that strain on peers can be explained.
Update:
I have just checked my Connections tab. All connected nodes are right now on the same height. So, it didn’t take long to get those falling behind to get updated.
1.2.10 problems, dust storm, low coin price