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

check that Byron can increment its adopted protocol version #1747

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 9, 2020

Conversation

nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor

@nfrisby nfrisby commented Mar 4, 2020

I'm not sure if this should be considered to fully address #1514, but it's good first step.

It originally that #1161 is high-priority because of votes: they are replicated and fill up the blocks, making the test quite expensive. Other transactions (so far) haven't been as problematic because duplicate transactions other than votes are invalid.

Therefore this PR is rooted on top of a potential fix for 1161; it's blocked by the corresponding PR. Good news, though: the protocol version update is succeeding when expected.

I'm opening this as Draft since it currently includes the latest state of the other PR.

@nfrisby nfrisby force-pushed the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch 2 times, most recently from 0c685cf to a9a224a Compare March 5, 2020 23:37
@nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor Author

nfrisby commented Mar 5, 2020

This PR is in Draft status because it currently includes the latest tip of @intricate's PR #1749 -- without that PR's contents, this PR's contents creates disruptively large blocks because of Issue 1161.

@nfrisby nfrisby force-pushed the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch from a9a224a to 556d89e Compare March 6, 2020 00:40
@nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor Author

nfrisby commented Mar 6, 2020

The single large commit contains two minor aspects that are tangentially related to the PR's focus.

  • I introduce data TestNodeInitialization blk, to clarify the ThreadNet interface, especially the rekeying part.
  • I essentially cut-and-paste mkProtocolRealPBFT out into its own module to so that the new code can also be located in a separate module.

@nfrisby nfrisby force-pushed the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch from 556d89e to 251d250 Compare March 6, 2020 14:08
@nfrisby nfrisby requested review from mrBliss and edsko March 6, 2020 14:08
@nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor Author

nfrisby commented Mar 6, 2020

I've requested review. The PR is in Draft just because it's currently rebased onto Luke's "intelligent" transactions PR. I expect an automatic rebase onto master once his is merged.

@nfrisby nfrisby force-pushed the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch from 251d250 to 2657302 Compare March 6, 2020 16:07
@nfrisby nfrisby marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2020 16:07
@nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor Author

nfrisby commented Mar 6, 2020

Luke's PR is merged! I rebased onto master and marked this PR Ready for Review.

@mrBliss mrBliss added the consensus issues related to ouroboros-consensus label Mar 6, 2020
The Byron to Shelley hard-fork will end the Byron era by adopting a specific
protocol version. This commit adds transactions and 'Property's to the RealPBFT
tests that confirm the Byron nodes are able to update their protocol version.
@nfrisby nfrisby force-pushed the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch from 2657302 to 9ffb6f9 Compare March 9, 2020 15:30
Copy link
Contributor

@edsko edsko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Glad that we found the voting problem!

@nfrisby
Copy link
Contributor Author

nfrisby commented Mar 9, 2020

bors r+

@iohk-bors
Copy link
Contributor

iohk-bors bot commented Mar 9, 2020

@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot merged commit 2c335de into master Mar 9, 2020
@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot deleted the nfrisby/issue-1514-Byron-hardfork-smoke branch March 9, 2020 18:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
consensus issues related to ouroboros-consensus
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants