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

WIP: Handle single pivot update + single peer; allow long non-finality #7611

Draft
wants to merge 91 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

flcl42
Copy link
Contributor

@flcl42 flcl42 commented Oct 16, 2024

Changes

  • Make use single pivot update in case of single peer: we update pivot block number in sync config once and if ;
  • Allow long non finality: sync does not progress if most recent finalized block is more than 128 blocks ago, which seems to be normal for L2s (got a case of 2000 blocks)

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce?

  • Bugfix (a non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (a change that causes existing functionality not to work as expected)
  • Optimization
  • Refactoring
  • Documentation update
  • Build-related changes
  • Other: Description

Testing

Requires testing

  • Yes
  • No

If yes, did you write tests?

  • Yes
  • No

Notes on testing

Need to sync as many nets as possible

Documentation

Requires documentation update

  • Yes - maybe we can mention one new setting
  • No

Requires explanation in Release Notes

  • Yes
  • No

@flcl42 flcl42 changed the title Handle single pivot update + single peer; allow long non-finality WIP: Handle single pivot update + single peer; allow long non-finality Oct 16, 2024
@marcindsobczak
Copy link
Contributor

I'm trying with a different approach - to use head block minus 64 instead of finalized block. It will not be 100% safe, but in e.g. optimism there is no other option, as there is no finalized hash in FCU until fully synced
#7586

@flcl42
Copy link
Contributor Author

flcl42 commented Oct 18, 2024

I'm trying with a different approach - to use head block minus 64 instead of finalized block. It will not be 100% safe, but in e.g. optimism there is no other option, as there is no finalized hash in FCU until fully synced #7586

@marcindsobczak Sounds good! Let me test your approach with taiko. Wdyt about the second part of the pr that fixes the following?: when we have one peer and single fcu sent we can't start snapsync

@marcindsobczak
Copy link
Contributor

@flcl42 current aproach is not working with one peer? Why?

Base automatically changed from taiko to master October 24, 2024 14:54
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.

5 participants