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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Refactor CometBFT to use a single underlying database #1039

Open
5 tasks
Tracked by #44
, #48
...
jmalicevic opened this issue Jun 27, 2023 · 5 comments
Open
5 tasks
Tracked by #44
, #48
...

Refactor CometBFT to use a single underlying database #1039

jmalicevic opened this issue Jun 27, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
P:storage-optimization Priority: Give operators greater control over storage and storage optimization

Comments

@jmalicevic
Copy link
Contributor

jmalicevic commented Jun 27, 2023 •
edited

Based on the analysis done in #64 and discussion with users in #68, we remove cometbft-db and refactor CometBFT to use only one database backend.

DoD:
@jmalicevic jmalicevic mentioned this issue Jun 27, 2023
Open
5 tasks
@jmalicevic jmalicevic added the P:storage-optimization Priority: Give operators greater control over storage and storage optimization label Jun 27, 2023
@jmalicevic jmalicevic added this to the 2023-Q3 milestone Jun 27, 2023
@jmalicevic jmalicevic mentioned this issue Jun 27, 2023
Open
21 tasks
@jmalicevic jmalicevic removed this from the 2023-Q3 milestone Jun 27, 2023
@melekes melekes mentioned this issue Jan 8, 2024
Open
@melekes
Copy link
Contributor

melekes commented Jan 8, 2024

Duplicate of #48 ?

@melekes melekes mentioned this issue Jan 8, 2024
Closed
@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jan 9, 2024

@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jan 9, 2024

@melekes the benchmarks are imo really important to understand.

@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jan 9, 2024 •
edited

Also, would you want something like this?

This was referenced Jan 27, 2024
Open
Closed
@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jan 28, 2024

Anyhow if we are doing this it makes most sense, imo, to just do it....

melekes added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2024
@melekes
docs: remove "Compile with RocksDB support"
659f61b 
until we have settled on a single database - #1039. Note I still think
RocksDB is faster even thought I don't have data to back it up. Anyway,
I don't think we should "endorse" any database in the meantime.

Refs #2786 (comment)
@melekes melekes mentioned this issue Apr 15, 2024
Merged
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2024
@melekes
docs: remove "Compile with RocksDB support" (#2814)
44bc624 
until we have settled on a single database - #1039. Note I still think
RocksDB is faster even thought I don't have data to back it up. Anyway,
I don't think we should "endorse" any database in the meantime.

Refs
#2786 (comment)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
P:storage-optimization Priority: Give operators greater control over storage and storage optimization
Projects
No open projects
CometBFT 2023
Status: Todo
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@melekes @faddat @jmalicevic