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

DISCUSS: Chain params for 0.1.1 network #202

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jan 31, 2019
Merged

DISCUSS: Chain params for 0.1.1 network #202

merged 8 commits into from
Jan 31, 2019

Conversation

hleb-albau
Copy link
Contributor

@hleb-albau hleb-albau commented Jan 26, 2019

https://github.com/cybercongress/cyberd/blob/chain_params/docs/overview.md
Here, I collect all params into a single place and create a small description about cosmos-sdk modules flow. Please, ask as many questions as you can, we will improve this doc.

Also, here I propose values on params.
I suggest increasing block size to 5s. Currently, on a small network, it takes about half a day to catch up the empty chain.

@hleb-albau hleb-albau changed the base branch from master to 0.1.1 January 26, 2019 15:59
@hleb-albau hleb-albau changed the title Chain params for 0.1.1 network DISCUSS: Chain params for 0.1.1 network Jan 26, 2019
@mastercyb
Copy link
Member

146 - Because of Dunbars number
1 second - Because with 5 seconds we will have pretty slow thing

@hleb-albau
Copy link
Contributor Author

146 - Because of Dunbars number
1 second - Because with 5 seconds we will have pretty slow thing

  1. Dunbars number not really related to validators problems. Cosmos-hub will slightly increate year by year validator set, starting 100 to 200 by 10 years.
  2. We should choose the trade-off between validator requirements and block generation speed. Currently, if we choose 1 sec, then all validators should have a very good internet connection to not miss block signing(by miss I mean not being offline, but just delayed sign). There is MinSignedPerWindow param, that set minimum successful block signs for SignedBlocksWindow. With unstable validators(our case right now), we should set it to higher value, say 2/3. In other case, network will eventually stop, cuz there are no 2/3 block signs. If we chouse high MinSignedPerWindow, than regular validators will be jailed frequently(we already see it on 0.1.0 testnet). That can scare away initial intusiasts. Guys from polka, said that for more than 20 valdiator, currently it is not really possible to have stable network with 1 sec block for a long period.

@mastercyb
Copy link
Member

mastercyb commented Jan 28, 2019

Guys from polka, said that for more than 20 valdiator, currently it is not really possible to have stable network with 1 sec block for a long period.

It's because the network runs without money. I bet it is possible in our setting

@mastercyb
Copy link
Member

Overall, I would discus with Valera first some principles of the network we are building. They define parametrs

@hleb-albau
Copy link
Contributor Author

@arturalbov Check it, please.

@hleb-albau hleb-albau merged commit d45decf into 0.1.1 Jan 31, 2019
@hleb-albau hleb-albau deleted the chain_params branch January 31, 2019 05:53
hleb-albau added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants