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

tendermint: Replace iavl with our own mkvs #1898

Closed
3 tasks done
Yawning opened this issue Jul 8, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2674
Closed
3 tasks done

tendermint: Replace iavl with our own mkvs #1898

Yawning opened this issue Jul 8, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2674
Assignees
Labels
c:breaking/consensus Category: breaking consensus changes c:consensus/cometbft Category: CometBFT c:storage Category: storage p:2 Priority: desired feature

Comments

@Yawning
Copy link
Contributor

Yawning commented Jul 8, 2019

We use the tendermint iavl library to store state for everything, but there's no reason that we need to do so, and it may be nice to re-use the MKVS implementation that we have for our own storage at some point.

Required:

Estimated cost: 1 sprint

@Yawning Yawning added p:3 Priority: nice to have c:storage Category: storage c:consensus/cometbft Category: CometBFT labels Jul 8, 2019
@kostko
Copy link
Member

kostko commented Nov 1, 2019

Another benefit is that our implementation is not sensitive to the order of updates so no sorting of keys is required. But we also need to evaluate performance first (would be beneficial for other purposes anyway).

@kostko kostko added the c:breaking/consensus Category: breaking consensus changes label Nov 1, 2019
@kostko
Copy link
Member

kostko commented Nov 28, 2019

Yet another benefit of this is that it would make it easier to write light consensus clients (they could just use our storage interface which already supports remote queries with proofs) -- in Go or in Rust.

@kostko kostko added p:2 Priority: desired feature and removed p:3 Priority: nice to have labels Nov 28, 2019
@kostko kostko self-assigned this Feb 12, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c:breaking/consensus Category: breaking consensus changes c:consensus/cometbft Category: CometBFT c:storage Category: storage p:2 Priority: desired feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants