-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
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
Add PR review policy #1183
Add PR review policy #1183
Conversation
ghost
commented
Nov 28, 2023
- CHANGELOG updated or not needed
- Documentation updated or not needed
- Haddocks updated or not needed
- No new TODOs introduced or explained herafter
Transactions CostsSizes and execution budgets for Hydra protocol transactions. Note that unlisted parameters are currently using
Script summary
Cost of Init Transaction
Cost of Commit TransactionThis is using ada-only outputs for better comparability.
Cost of CollectCom Transaction
Cost of Close Transaction
Cost of Contest Transaction
Cost of Abort TransactionSome variation because of random mixture of still initial and already committed outputs.
Cost of FanOut TransactionInvolves spending head output and burning head tokens. Uses ada-only UTxO for better comparability.
End-To-End Benchmark ResultsThis page is intended to collect the latest end-to-end benchmarks results produced by Hydra's Continuous Integration system from the latest Please take those results with a grain of salt as they are currently produced from very limited cloud VMs and not controlled hardware. Instead of focusing on the absolute results, the emphasis should be on relative results, eg. how the timings for a scenario evolve as the code changes. Generated at 2023-12-01 13:51:01.912474812 UTC 3-nodes ScenarioA rather typical setup, with 3 nodes forming a Hydra head.
Baseline ScenarioThis scenario represents a minimal case and as such is a good baseline against which to assess the overhead introduced by more complex setups. There is a single hydra-node d with a single client submitting single input and single output transactions with a constant UTxO set of 1.
|
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.
Thanks for writing it down. It does appear a lot more strict than what we do today. I'm happy to try it out, but am afraid that approvals would become inflationary when so many are needed also for small changes. For example, the first approval is important, the following less so as people would just be needing to tick the box often.
@ch1bo I agree this is perhaps too restrictive a policy, I just transcribed what we said in the Tactical couple of days ago. Happy to relax the policy. |
8e2cce7
to
482d3c8
Compare
482d3c8
to
9f468e4
Compare
9f468e4
to
be20aa8
Compare