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

miner :: add : check to run worker commitWork #828

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 20, 2023
Merged

Conversation

0xsharma
Copy link
Member

Description

In this PR, we check if the node is running with --mine /(miner node) , then only we do the resource extensive operations of executing transactions and committing work. On full nodes, these operations shall not take place and hence result in better efficiency of the nodes.

@0xsharma 0xsharma requested review from JekaMas, temaniarpit27 and a team April 18, 2023 17:51
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 19, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.01 🎉

Comparison is base (2667461) 56.67% compared to head (872d1e7) 56.68%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #828      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    56.67%   56.68%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          611      611              
  Lines        72227    72228       +1     
===========================================
+ Hits         40933    40942       +9     
+ Misses       27805    27794      -11     
- Partials      3489     3492       +3     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
miner/worker.go 68.45% <100.00%> (-0.49%) ⬇️

... and 25 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@0xsharma 0xsharma merged commit 6dee9b5 into develop Apr 20, 2023
15 checks passed
@0xsharma 0xsharma deleted the shivam/POS-1439 branch April 20, 2023 07:01
@ssandeep
Copy link
Contributor

Let's also try to raise this in geth?

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.

None yet

5 participants