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
eager_dlinear timer is reporting consensus duration metric greater than legacy increasing time. The eager_dlinear starts measuring duration BEFORE it can propose so the duration of eager timers start before normal times. How do we compare the duration of eager timers vs normal timers, since they do not measure the same thing?
🛠️ Proposed solution
There are some ways to approach this:
Consensus delay from start of slot (or start of duty offset) is probably best. But that includes fetcher delay, so the data wouldn't be focussed on consensus only, so biased by beacon node score. At least the bias introduced should be uncorrelated to timer type.
Other option:
Duration from consensus propose (post fetcher) to consensus decide
This could however result in negative values for eager timers, but that is probably fine.
Refactors the consensus duration metric to `duration=consensus_decided_at-consensus_proposed_at` so that eager timer durations are reflected correctly since they start much earlier than normal timing strategies.
category: refactor
ticket: #2337
🎯 Problem to be solved
eager_dlinear
timer is reporting consensus duration metric greater than legacy increasing time. Theeager_dlinear
starts measuring duration BEFORE it can propose so the duration of eager timers start before normal times. How do we compare the duration of eager timers vs normal timers, since they do not measure the same thing?🛠️ Proposed solution
There are some ways to approach this:
duration=consensus_decided_at-consensus_proposed_at
🧪 Tests
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: