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 DAG store CLI commands #6736

Closed
raulk opened this issue Jul 12, 2021 · 1 comment
Closed

implement DAG store CLI commands #6736

raulk opened this issue Jul 12, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
area/ux Area: UX

Comments

@raulk
Copy link
Member

raulk commented Jul 12, 2021

#6671 removes Badger from the dealmaking flow, integrates indexed CARv2 that can act as standalone blockstores, and introduces a new component called "DAG store" to manage deal data in a sharded way, where each deal is a shard.

Read more about the DAG store in the design document.

In order to make the DAG store observable and manageable, we should introduce a new command lotus dagstore in the Lotus miner binary, targeting the Lotus markets subsystem, with the following subcommands:

  • lotus dagstore shard-list => enumerates shards and their status.
  • lotus dagstore shard-destroy --key <key> --force => forcefully destroys a shard.
  • lotus dagstore shard-fetch --key <key> => manual shard fetch.
  • lotus dagstore shard-index --key <key> => manual reindex.
  • lotus dagstore gc => calls DAGStore GC.
@jennijuju jennijuju added the area/ux Area: UX label Jul 19, 2021
@rjan90
Copy link
Contributor

rjan90 commented Mar 31, 2022

Hey!

Closing this issue since we have multiple ways of observing and managing the Dagstore in Lotus now.

It also seems like most of the subcommands listed has been implemented. Only missing a potential shard-destroy command. If you want, I can create a separate ticket for that?

@rjan90 rjan90 closed this as completed Mar 31, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/ux Area: UX
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants