Make the local network script support a dense3 network option #2988
Conversation
This is comparable to how dev networks deploy right now This also changes the prometheus.yml.template so that we start prometheus if we have a LOG_BRANCH variable, but we don't attempt to push to grafana unless we have a GRAFANA_PASSWORD set
tools/local-network/local_network.py
Outdated
| basic_auth: | ||
| username: 8687 | ||
| password: ${GRAFANA_PASSWORD} | ||
| '''.replace('${GRAFANA_PASSWORD}', grafana_password) if grafana_password else "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's a bit janky to remove this stuff from the .template file but I didn't see a simpler way to accomplish this
i'm not sure the grafana push stuff is really important to us anymore, we can just use prometheus directly when doing local networks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not fully understanding why this got removed from the template file. it seems to be doing more or less the same logic and looks like it could stay in the template file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I need to be able to start Prometheus even if i don't have a grafana password
I guess i could check what happens if you put a junk password in, maybe it fails authentication and then continues running normally
🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh I misinterpreted the code I was thinking this was setting the password to "" but it's setting the template_extra to ""
tools/local-network/local_network.py
Outdated
| basic_auth: | ||
| username: 8687 | ||
| password: ${GRAFANA_PASSWORD} | ||
| '''.replace('${GRAFANA_PASSWORD}', grafana_password) if grafana_password else "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not fully understanding why this got removed from the template file. it seems to be doing more or less the same logic and looks like it could stay in the template file.
| for i in range(num_nodes): | ||
| other_nodes = [str(j) for j in range(num_nodes) if i != j] | ||
| peers = [Peer(p) for p in other_nodes] | ||
| self.add_node(str(i), peers, QuorumSet(1, other_nodes)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❓ With a quorum set of 1 do we get much benefit use out of having 3 nodes running?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the quorum sets are "self + 1", so this effectively means that 2 nodes have to validate anything that happens. So that's what we want in a 2 out of 3 configuration
it looks that prometheus doesn't particularly care if the remote-write part doesn't work due to lack of a grafana password, so we can leave it in the template file unconditionally
* Make the local network script support a dense3 network option This is comparable to how dev networks deploy right now This also changes the prometheus.yml.template so that we start prometheus if we have a LOG_BRANCH variable, but we don't attempt to push to grafana unless we have a GRAFANA_PASSWORD set * simplify the part about disabling grafana it looks that prometheus doesn't particularly care if the remote-write part doesn't work due to lack of a grafana password, so we can leave it in the template file unconditionally * fixup whitespace * update documentation for the script
The purpose of this was to do a local slam with prometheus and compare to the results we get in the cloud.
My results were like this:
So, I did not match the ~100 tx/s that Eran was seeing in the dev networks, but I did get about twice as high as I was getting for a 5 node network locally. (See other results here: #2934)