You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 22, 2025. It is now read-only.
skipped reason is hard to tell. and aspiring validator operators wants to know the reason.
Proposed Solution
make each validator's decision visible as a first citizen of information by appending memo instruction to vote transactions, from the side-effect of gossiped vote txes.
overhead can be ok? (F = fork, N = number of timeline, T = byte of timestamp, R = byte of reason, F * (size_of<Slot> + N * (T + R)) assume F = 5, N = 10, T = 4, R = 2 => 5 * (8 + 10 * (4 + 2)) => 340 bytes` per vote.
so, 10,000 votes/sec => 3.4 MBps overhead?
also, squeeze timestamp bytes with offset us (u32) and base time (u64)?
also, this will be used for casual diagnostics, so no need to protect it under consensus-level security.
tagging: @carllin@behzadnouri
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
well, I'm abandoning this whole idea, I ended up creating what I wanted via influx metrics. and it seems enough, although it excludes nodes without metrics enabled.: #18308 (comment)
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any activity in past 7 days after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Problem
skipped reason is hard to tell. and aspiring validator operators wants to know the reason.
Proposed Solution
make each validator's decision visible as a first citizen of information by appending memo instruction to vote transactions, from the side-effect of gossiped vote txes.
maybe like this?
overhead can be ok? (F = fork, N = number of timeline, T = byte of timestamp, R = byte of reason,
F * (size_of<Slot> + N * (T + R))
assume F = 5, N = 10, T = 4, R = 2 => 5 * (8 + 10 * (4 + 2)) => 340 bytes` per vote.so, 10,000 votes/sec => 3.4 MBps overhead?
also, squeeze timestamp bytes with offset us (u32) and base time (u64)?
also, this will be used for casual diagnostics, so no need to protect it under consensus-level security.
tagging: @carllin @behzadnouri
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: