-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Add DCAP and pallet_xcm benchmarks #210
Conversation
clangenb
commented
May 17, 2023
•
edited
Loading
edited
- Re-run the pallet-teerex benchmarks
- added the pallet-xcm benchmarks, closes add benchmarked xcm weights #207.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
// Measured: `0` | ||
// Estimated: `0` | ||
// Minimum execution time: 18_446_744_073_709_551 nanoseconds. | ||
Weight::from_ref_time(18_446_744_073_709_551_000) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this shouldn't have slipped our reviews. very funny execution time indeed. this most likely breaks receiving XCM messages and makes everything overweight. CC @clangenb
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, interesting. Funnily, moonbeam has the same weird weight for teleport assets, but their execute()
weight seems fine: https://github.com/moonbeam-foundation/moonbeam/blob/d4fdae0cf795ebb48b7a2a9c2167c7dae56e782f/runtime/common/src/weights/pallet_xcm.rs#L75
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
fixing this doesn't solve our problem, unfortunately. but needs fixing anyway