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

Sorting Qi / Quai Properly #1958

Open
mibuono opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Sorting Qi / Quai Properly #1958

mibuono opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mibuono
Copy link

mibuono commented Jul 22, 2024

Having sets of quai and sets of qi transactions, we need to order the transactions based on the tip from both sets.

@mibuono
Copy link
Author

mibuono commented Jul 22, 2024

Should have an async process to sort the pool - and it should be doing it with an algorithm that you dont need completion and can just do it with rounds to get approximate sorting.

The tx pool is shared with worker and state processor. We can't lock up the pool because it will lock up the state processor. In order to fix this, we may need to copy the tx pool to run this sortition situation.

@mibuono mibuono assigned Djadih and unassigned jdowning100 Aug 19, 2024
@kiltsonfire kiltsonfire added this to the GoldAge Testnet milestone Aug 19, 2024
@mibuono
Copy link
Author

mibuono commented Sep 4, 2024

Notes from SPIKE:

Refactor the mempool: (Hussam)
Worker - needs to read the pending
Pending is getting sorting by a partial sorting function (new)
So we can have a finite time for locking pending transactions
Everytime transactions are added to pending, the sorting function should run every so often to sort them.

@Djadih Djadih linked a pull request Oct 3, 2024 that will close this issue
@rileystephens28
Copy link
Member

To do this properly we need to unify the tx pool. What we should be doing is creating a limited set which is what we should consume then sort in the worker.

@mibuono mibuono modified the milestones: GoldAge Testnet, Mainnet Oct 14, 2024
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 a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants