-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 289
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
Tag relevant peer #4997
Tag relevant peer #4997
Conversation
Performance Report✔️ no performance regression detected Full benchmark results
|
I think this duplicates the work of ChainSafe/js-libp2p-gossipsub#380 the plan outlined here is to have the option to configure priority peers to prevent the connection manager pruning connections to high-value peers. in the interim we could just leave maxConnections and https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/blob/unstable/packages/beacon-node/src/network/nodejs/util.ts#L73 as the default (both |
@maschad @tuyennhv Was thinking about this recently, I think we can do both this PR and ChainSafe/js-libp2p-gossipsub#380 While they both tag peers, I think each has its own merit. Tagging mesh peers in gossipsub is helpful for any users of gossipsub to avoid disconnecting these important peers. If both of these PRs were implemented, if libp2p peer manager were to disconnect a peer, hopefully both tags would work together to give better behavior:
|
@wemeetagain good point, I suppose as long as there isn't the prospect of a performance penalty as suggested here then I agree that having both tags would serve as a safeguard against this type of disconnection. |
thanks @wemeetagain @maschad for your feeback @dapplion also suggested to use we can also do both and add |
#5001 was merged which set |
f8ac6ea
to
a29edf4
Compare
Motivation
Description
maxConnections
option in libp2p's connection managerfound it from #4623
Test result