-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
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
[WIP] Base weights for Host implementations #49
Conversation
what’s the purpose of this? this looks like a documentation rather standard proposal. why placing all the actual numbers here that are subject to change? |
I think the motivation section makes the purpose of this quite clear?
Basically, Hosts that execute the Runtime should roughly know what the expected overhead of the database, etc, is. I'm aware those numbers are subject to change, but they don't get updated often and will most likely even become more conservative as time goes on. Also, as mentioned above, bandwidth weights are still missing and the inner details of the the weight structures/systems are not relevant here given that the Runtime handles that stuff (and Substrate devs), not the Host. Also, this was first written for our spec, I proposed to make it a PSP. But maybe it should actually be in the spec instead. |
The whole reason we automatically benchmark the weights is that we can adjust them easily to reflect new optimizations / recommended hardwares. We do want to make sure the weights are always up to dated. |
This is based on paritytech/substrate#10918
This draft still needs more work, explanations and numbers, especially regarding bandwidths. On
polkadot
's side there's a branch regarding this that hasn't been worked on in months. I'll leave this open for now and will continue on this once the implementation respectively the design decision is clearer.Preview: https://github.com/w3f/PSPs/blob/weights/PSPs/drafts/psp-49.md