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

Implement PoW work-based prioritization #1298

Closed
rkeene opened this issue Oct 12, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@rkeene
Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 12, 2018

To prioritize blocks as the network scales up, implement a simple greater-work-processed-sooner mechanism for incoming blocks for voting.

On a representative, as blocks to vote on are ingested, add them to a sorted data structure where their index is their work value. When dequeuing those items, pull from the highest first.

This is related to issues #196, #506, and #1064.

@rkeene

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Oct 23, 2018

This work did not get completed in time for V17.0 and I don't want to burden our cleanup efforts in V18.0 with it, so it has been pushed to V19.0. It may get done sooner and included in V18.0, or a patch release to V17 if it is of acceptable risk/reward.

@clemahieu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Oct 25, 2018

@rkeene rkeene modified the milestones: V19.0, V17.0 Oct 29, 2018

@rkeene

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Oct 29, 2018

We're going to split this work up and this part (simple greater-work means greater-priority) in V17 and then later implement further enhancements:

  1. Client resending when it detects it won't get processed quickly enough by the network
  2. Rate limiting on server dequeuing
@rkeene

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Nov 29, 2018

The initial part of this has been merged into V17 (as #1413), pending testing it will be deployed as part of V17

@rkeene rkeene closed this Nov 29, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.