-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 721
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Set PoV size limit to 10 Mb #5884
Open
s0me0ne-unkn0wn
wants to merge
7
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
s0me0ne/max-pov-config
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
06108e1
Set PoV size limit to 10 Mb
s0me0ne-unkn0wn 0a9970a
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into s0me0ne/max-pov-config
s0me0ne-unkn0wn f88331e
Fix bridges
s0me0ne-unkn0wn 387f1dc
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into s0me0ne/max-pov-config
s0me0ne-unkn0wn 15e91e7
Fix bridges more
s0me0ne-unkn0wn 5452419
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into s0me0ne/max-pov-config
s0me0ne-unkn0wn 3095f7f
Restore lost feature propagation
s0me0ne-unkn0wn File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did we validate this works e2e, like have a parachain that generates 10MiB PoV and confirm parachain blocks work at 6s rate with all blocks included on chain ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It kind of makes sense to add a glutton test with these 10MB PoVs. Later we should do a more scaled up test on Versi.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We haven't validated anything yet (beyond running local zombienets to ensure 10 Mb PoVs work in principle). The purpose of this PR is to gather opinions and concerns, we're not merging it before we do a lot of tests anyway.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's what I was asking for :D.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But the description of the PRs and my own reasoning tells me that we can merge it. PoV should still be limited by the relay runtime config value at 5MB. To have 10MB in practice you need governance to bump the chain limit and also parachain runtimes to be adjusted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, okay, I'll put that another way. By this PR, I argue that the given changeset is enough to enable 10 Mb PoVs, and I expect others to argue why it is not. @alexggh's point is that we need more testing before applying the changes, and that's fair. By now, I've finished the local tests with gluttons and will do some stress tests. After that, I'm ready to go to Versi, but I'd like to make it as close to real-life as possible on Versi, that is, to start with a regular network with 5 Mb PoVs and then upgrade it to 10 Mb step by step.
But if the lack of testing is the only argument against merging it in this form, it's beautiful ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was simply asking, because I was curious what tests we've done on this end, the fact that you ran it locally with 10MiB is good enough for me.
I understand that the relay-chain configuration is guarding us against using more than 5MiB, and it is probably safe to merge it without positive evidence that the new maximum is working all the way trough our stack, I was simply trying to avoid the situation where we raise this constant because we know the relay-chain configuration is at 5MiB and it is risk free now, but then 6 months later someone else comes without this context and raises the relay-chain configuration to 10MiB because MAX_POV_SIZE is already 10MiB and it must be safe :D.