-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 115
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
a node that follows and checks #2340
Conversation
b1e98a9
to
15b8597
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2340 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 67.26% 67.26% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 313 316 +3
Lines 29310 29564 +254
==========================================
+ Hits 19714 19886 +172
- Misses 7212 7251 +39
- Partials 2384 2427 +43
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
15b8597
to
ee85f8f
Compare
ee85f8f
to
0017437
Compare
0017437
to
a7bcdca
Compare
new in this push:
|
updates from Friday and additional notes:
|
340d387
to
f7213e8
Compare
new in this push and from Monday:
|
f7213e8
to
71df126
Compare
So this also fixes #2459 or it just makes the key manager optional? |
just makes the key manager optional |
8357197
to
abf746a
Compare
We previously left the total supply inconsistent when transferring tokens to/from a runtime. Fix that to adjust the total supply accordingly when transferring. It was also proposed to move these transferred tokens to/from per-runtime holding areas for bookkeeping. That remains a good idea. It's proposed in #2377 to dismantle this whole runtime transfer system. So with any luck, none of this will be used after all.
We call Unix() and cast to unsigned in some parts of the code. Changing the unspecific "very early" dummy time so that it doesn't go negative and cause weird far-future times after casting.
abf746a
to
7509fa3
Compare
in the latest push:
ready for review |
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.
Rebase on master and get rid of protobuf updates, otherwise besides some minor nits I think this looks good. I think naming this something like "check invariants" or "invariant checker" would be better than "followtool" though.
renamed |
ok all lights greenish. gonna merge |
This is proposed as the beginning of auditing tools. There's no fast sync, so you would join the network as a node, and while you catch up, you do additional processing to check invariants. Our ABCI mux system allows us to put these checks in a mux app.
cc #2277