Client design: add "one database per key" alternative
@@ -279,6 +279,10 @@ Supporting a wallet assumes risk. Effort required to implement wallet functiona
- light client protocol as currently implemented requires stack assumptions
such as protobufs and a hardcoded lightserver to talk to
+- What about having one database per key?
+ - easy to reliably delete or backup all data related to a single key
+ - might use slightly more space/CPU
+ - slightly harder to delete all the keys
# Unresolved questions
[unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions
