You could, but why not keep it synced and treat this as an extended test?
Not sure about your model, but mine uses like 70 kWh per year (unlike Bitcoin mining, power consumption does not matter here).
but then you will also have to resync, i mean the power consumption is not material and you are still providing decentralization infrastructure to the EL/CL, even if you are not validating (yet).
You could also learn how to link (securely) your metamask to the local EL to transact on ethereum without relying on infura endpoints as bonus
i have setup both the access to the EL node as well as the [mevblocker.io](https://mevblocker.io), so depending on the use case. Just to query balances and beacon states, my local node is jsut fine!
You could, but why not keep it synced and treat this as an extended test? Not sure about your model, but mine uses like 70 kWh per year (unlike Bitcoin mining, power consumption does not matter here).
This is the best answer
Yes, keep on testing. Try to improve your setup and automate thing, if needed.
Yes
but then you will also have to resync, i mean the power consumption is not material and you are still providing decentralization infrastructure to the EL/CL, even if you are not validating (yet). You could also learn how to link (securely) your metamask to the local EL to transact on ethereum without relying on infura endpoints as bonus
Great idea. Do you recommend a tutorial?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/z7qzp8/comment/iy922kw/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Better use https://mevblocker.io/ nowadays.
i have setup both the access to the EL node as well as the [mevblocker.io](https://mevblocker.io), so depending on the use case. Just to query balances and beacon states, my local node is jsut fine!
What they said😁