forked from algorand/go-algorand
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Feature/pipeline before merge #10
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
Open
cce
wants to merge
153
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
feature/pipeline-before-merge
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This will be useful for building a speculative ledger on top of a ValidatedBlock. Although the deltas as, in principle, sufficient, the roundCowState is more efficient for operations like looking up a particular account.
…/pipeline-wip-agreement
…to feature/pipeline
will help identify the protocol version for old-style pipelined votes/blocks, in a subsequent commit
Slightly tricky because we need to consider two cases separately. If the seed is fully committed, we don't need to search for the appropriate player; any of them will be fine. But if the seed is only speculatively committed, we need to find the right player.
instead of filling it in from demux, fill it in from the player instead, since the player is now tracking versions.
when we wanted multiple timeouts that happen to be at the same time, our implemenation had funny behavior: if the timeout already expired, we got a closed channel, which implicitly signaled as many timeouts as we wanted. but if the timeout was in the future, time.After() would only write a single time.Time value in the channel, so at most one timeout would fire.
no reason to start pipelining faster than that, because FilterTimeout limits how fast we can commit the pipelined agreements anyway.
cce
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2023
…ase1.1 CR: mainly naming changes
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is the same as https://github.com/algorand/go-algorand/tree/feature/pipeline but without some cherry-picked CI-related commits added to the end