Skip to content
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

Benchmark single transfer per node #267

Merged

Conversation

apoorv-2204
Copy link
Contributor

@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 commented Mar 28, 2022

Description

Benchmarking TPS per node
A transaction complete when a pending transaction converts to
transaction chain and there is received info about replication.

View Initial Tasks
  • (1)-Implement a Faucet Provider
    --Get Dummy UCO from test-net
  • (2)-Create a Method to transfer UCO Coin from A to B.
  • (3)- Create a method to transfer A to b 1_000 and B to A 1_000
  • (4)- Run method transfer 1000 times concurrently for this. Node.
  • (5)-Use benchee and calculate TPS
    Tasks one to one
  • Random A to b
  • Random A to B with considerable chain length
  • mark tps complete when Replication notification is there
    Way
  • External
Type of change - Regression Testing - Benchmarking TPS

Epic: #228

implement websocket

  • subscriber
  • phx , event ws handler

new subtasks

  • implement (tps seed queue)
  • implement view: completion
  • implement view: ingestion
  • WebSocket must handle large abs nb of sub query
  • Correct reporting of completed and uncompleted txns

@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 changed the title 228_first_commit Resolves #228 Mar 28, 2022
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 changed the title Resolves #228 Resolves #228 Benchmarking TPS per Node Mar 28, 2022
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 self-assigned this Mar 29, 2022
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 marked this pull request as draft March 29, 2022 09:04
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 changed the title Resolves #228 Benchmarking TPS per Node [WIP]: Resolves #228 Benchmarking TPS per Node Mar 29, 2022
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 added core team Assigned to the core team system Involve system management testing Improve testing labels Mar 29, 2022
mix.exs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mix.exs Show resolved Hide resolved
mix.exs Show resolved Hide resolved
mix.exs Show resolved Hide resolved
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 30, 2022

You can take inspiration of this one

def send_funds_to(recipient_address, host, port, amount \\ 10) do

@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 changed the title [WIP]: Resolves #228 Benchmarking TPS per Node 228 [WIP]: Benchmarking TPS per Node Mar 31, 2022
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 requested a review from a user March 31, 2022 16:25
config/dev.exs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 requested a review from a user May 2, 2022 13:36
@ghost ghost force-pushed the 228_benchmark_tps_per_node branch from 2f8fe1c to b54bd9d Compare May 2, 2022 20:12
@ghost ghost force-pushed the 228_benchmark_tps_per_node branch from b54bd9d to b850451 Compare May 2, 2022 20:15
@ghost ghost force-pushed the 228_benchmark_tps_per_node branch 2 times, most recently from 0d5605d to 09629ea Compare May 3, 2022 11:30
@ghost ghost force-pushed the 228_benchmark_tps_per_node branch from 09629ea to 8e99f8f Compare May 3, 2022 11:33
@ghost ghost changed the title Benchmarking TPS per Node Benchmark single transfer per node May 3, 2022
@ghost ghost merged commit 9fdbe51 into archethic-foundation:develop May 3, 2022
ghost pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 6, 2022
Also includes:
* Fix ledger movements resolution to add burn movement 
* Resolve transaction recipients by time 

Co-authored-by: bl@ckode <mrblackode@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Samuel <samuel@uniris.io>
@apoorv-2204 apoorv-2204 deleted the 228_benchmark_tps_per_node branch May 9, 2022 17:16
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core team Assigned to the core team feature New feature request system Involve system management testing Improve testing
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants