j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckMª <div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=665.msg14090#msg14090">Quote from: lfm on September 26, 2010, 08:24:11 AM</a></div><div class="quote"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=665.msg6928#msg6928">Quote from: bytemaster on August 01, 2010, 08:14:29 PM</a></div><div class="quote">I want to have multiple "accounts" with unique balances and to send and receive coins on a per-account basis. The equiv. of having multiple wallets running at the same time. <br/><br/>It would help to simply list the balance for each 'receiving address' and to specify a 'source' address when sending coins. <br/></div><br/>I guess one way to do this would be use the -datadir=<dir> command line arg to specify a data directory (other than the default "$(HOME)/.bitcoin/"). You would only run the client on one directory at a time. (Note the directory is relative to the current directory for the SERVER bitcoind. Its safest to specify a fully qualified directory starting at the root.) Also of course the client does not need to be running on any specific directory nor running at all to receive payments to addresses in any/all of the wallets.<br/><br/><br/><br/></div><br/>Yeah, I've been considering how to best go about this for the web services. Right now multiple services on the same machine run multiple clients bound to separate rpc ports. It works... to a point.<br/><br/>What I want is a separate wallet per user, and that scales pretty badly, so what I thought could be done is have multiple wallets in memory at the same time, based on some key (which would be the subdir inside the datadir for the wallet) and the rpc calls would take a -wallet= switch. I just don't know how many wallets I would be able to keep in memory at the same time, and I would loose the ability to move money instantly amongst them, but that's ok, I guess.<br/><br/>A slightly more scalable alternative would be to lazily load the wallets on demand. I know wallets keep a bunch of information, but maybe we could limit that to own addresses and transactions?<br/><br/>Satoshi: are you planning on doing any of this? As I'm not familiar with this part of the code, it would suck to spend a week trying to figure out the best way to do this and then you pushing the perfect implementation to svn <img alt="Smiley" border="0" src="/static/img/emoticons/smiley.gif"/></div> text/html
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/006895d6648de70016f8c056894846fe5fc39422cfff92997eeef1e94de232b9