-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 338
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
test: testground sanity check with knuu #3194
Conversation
…es per instance and to plot block time, size and throughput
|
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.
Seems to all make sense. Have you had any preliminary results yet as to whether having it as a separate instance enables greater load on the network?
test/e2e/testnet.go
Outdated
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ type Testnet struct { | |||
nodes []*Node | |||
genesisAccounts []*Account | |||
keygen *keyGenerator | |||
txSimNode *TxSim |
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.
Do we want just a single tx sim node? Would that be sufficient to load the testnet?
Maybe it's fine to start with one and not prematurely over-engineer it
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.
Maybe it's fine to start with one and not prematurely over-engineer it
Indeed, I intended to do it incrementally, first by testing out a single instance of txsim and debugging it, then scaling up if the desired load is not met.
test/e2e/testnet.go
Outdated
if err != nil { | ||
return err | ||
} | ||
err = txsim.Instance.AddFolder(keyringPath, volumePath, "10001:10001") |
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.
I didn't know this was possible. This is useful also for regular consensus nodes
Not yet, was awaiting reviews on the PR before moving forward with the test. I will conduct it and share the results soon. |
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 looks great 🚀
I only have two small things
…ns up one txsim node
Migrating this PR to this one |
In replace of #3184
Closes #3189