Skip to content

Conversation

@ktechmidas
Copy link
Contributor

@ktechmidas ktechmidas commented Jun 25, 2023

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

This will make the deployment multi-staged, so we can run stage2 after chainlocks are formed. This is important because we need chainlocks in order to:

  1. Anticipate this change: fix: do not check chainlock state in IsTxSafeForMining dash#5444 and do a two-staged spork enable
  2. Start mixing
  3. Start proposing as we need superblocks for this which aren't usually enabled until ~4200

We could check quorums for the above, but since quorums are required for chainlocks I thought it better to check for chainlocks then we don't need to guess if the quorums are good.

What was done?

Changed /bin/deploy to have a new variable called STAGE where we can give it the stage we want to deploy.
Created continue.yml with a basic chainlock check

How Has This Been Tested?

devnet-yankee

Breaking Changes

None, leaving out "stage" will deploy stage1 as normal.

@ktechmidas ktechmidas requested a review from strophy June 25, 2023 06:09
@strophy strophy changed the title Initial multi-stage deployment code feat: initial multi-stage deployment Jun 26, 2023
Copy link
Collaborator

@strophy strophy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure having continue.yml launch as a sub-stage of the deploy command makes sense, we either need to add a lot of error handling here (e.g. what if we deploy stage 2, but specify -i flag? I think it would be simpler to remove the case statement and just create a new top level executable script like bin/start-stage-2-services, except with a better name than that.

register: chainlock_output
ignore_errors: true
no_log: true

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
changed_when: chainlock_output.rc == 0`

@ktechmidas
Copy link
Contributor Author

-i wouldn't affect stage2, it will just be ignored @strophy since it only actually does anything with -i in stage1

image

Copy link
Collaborator

@strophy strophy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good start, let's see how this goes when we start adding functions

@ktechmidas ktechmidas merged commit 1c046fd into v0.25-dev Jun 26, 2023
@ktechmidas ktechmidas deleted the stages branch June 26, 2023 05:14
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.

3 participants