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

Ts=new reward pulser #4196

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Ts=new reward pulser #4196

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

TimSheard
Copy link
Contributor

@TimSheard TimSheard commented Mar 12, 2024

Addresses issue #4191

Checklist

  • Commit sequence broadly makes sense and commits have useful messages
  • New tests are added if needed and existing tests are updated
  • When applicable, versions are updated in .cabal and CHANGELOG.md files according to the
    versioning process.
  • The version bounds in .cabal files for all affected packages are updated. If you change the bounds in a cabal file, that package itself must have a version increase. (See RELEASING.md)
  • All visible changes are prepended to the latest section of a CHANGELOG.md for the affected packages. New section is never added with the code changes. (See RELEASING.md)
  • Code is formatted with fourmolu (use scripts/fourmolize.sh)
  • Cabal files are formatted (use scripts/cabal-format.sh)
  • hie.yaml has been updated (use scripts/gen-hie.sh)
  • Self-reviewed the diff

@lehins
Copy link
Collaborator

lehins commented Apr 1, 2024

@TimSheard and @dnadales
So, what is the future of this PR? Do we want to switch the behavior of the pulser or was this just an experiment that we n o longer need to pursue?

@dnadales
Copy link
Member

@TimSheard and @dnadales So, what is the future of this PR? Do we want to switch the behavior of the pulser or was this just an experiment that we n o longer need to pursue?

If we could change the behaviour of the pulser, that might help us reduce the number of leadership checks missed in block-producing nodes, so I'd say it makes sense to run a benchmark with a pulser that does not need to be evaluated when taking snapshots.

If we have a ledger version to integrate with Consensus, I can run the benchmarks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants