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

Week 16 - January 18 - Antelope resource model recap, future topics, special-purpose nodes #113

Open
Tracked by #37
chillsauce opened this issue Jan 18, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@chillsauce
Copy link
Member

chillsauce commented Jan 18, 2023

Antelope Node Operator Roundtable

Antelope Node Operators, community members and Antelope core developers meet every Wednesday at 14:00 UTC to discuss opportunities to improve the Antelope protocol for node operators.

💬 Join us in Telegram
🗂 See all meeting summaries

🗓 January 18 - 14:00 UTC

🎥 Watch the recording
Passcode: 490xi*Av

Summary

🟢 Leap Software Status

  • Antelope software updates coming soon:
    • Patch releases for 3.1 and 3.2 to address Ship instability issues
    • New release of DUNE

Technical roundtable for Antelope Node Operators

  • Brian from ENF provided a resource model status update and lead a discussion to solicit feedback on future roundtable topics, as well as some more specific discussion around special-purpose nodes.

Quick Status Update on Resource Model

- Not yet committing to doing these things
- Pain Points Discussion
    - RAM scalability limits
    - Ease of use challenges
    - Impact to Service Nodes
- Potential Scope Identified
    - Bill for failed transactions
    - Enable off-chain service node abuse prevention at proxy layer
    - State scaling strategy
    - Ability to lower RAM cost reduction rate
    - Contract access to account resource usage
- Next steps
    - Determine how these changes play with other related changes being made by ENF, Grant Recipients, RFP winners
    - Select initiatives
    - Prioritize against other initiatives
    - Organize into target releases
    - Technical design
    - Work breakdown

Future Roundtable Topic Brainstorm

- Ross: Challenges with Peering
    - Rotation of Peers
    - State of Peer latency status
    - Ross: First stop is Matthew’s EOS nation tool
    - Daniel: EOS Nation has someone who’s full time job is dealing with Peering.
    - Kevin: Default of 100 blocks at a time is not good
- Denis: Single Resource Model
    - Get into detail on merging NET and CPU
- Denis: What the chain has used with Anchor and PowerUp to address usability.
    - What NATIVE solutions could we implement?
    - BOID PowerUp tool
    - Opportunity right now as Aaron/Greymass is implementing WharfKit
    - When PowerUp goes down, the most frequent reason is because it needs a PowerUp
    - BOID - potential “easy win” solution listen to transactions on an endpoint and trigger a PowerUp - “Auto PowerUp”.
    - New client SDKs would likely be ready before a server implementation would be possible.
- Aaron: Resource Payer in 2.1 but not in LEAP
    - This would be nice to have
    - Don’t append no-op actions
    - A protocol feature that could be enabled to override first-action is payer
- Aaron: A method to guarantee connectivity between peers
    - Like a peer key, but with a priority
    - Operator is running public nodes, it can get full because of non-preferred peers.
- Denis: Contract error handling on other contracts
    - They interact with other smart contracts
    - When there is an error it is non-explicit
    - They don’t even know what contract the error is coming from.
    - Matt Witherspoon has an idea of a Backtrace

Nodes that are dedicated to a specific purpose

- Aaron: Read-only nodeos instances
    - On Steem there was a flag you could set when launching a node so that it would be read-only
    - Read-only to the state
    - Prevents syncing and push transactions
    - The read only nodeos instance would read from the state file of another nodeos instance
    - Greymass has servers that run many nodes instances and each needs it’s own state file
    - This would alleviate pressure off of nodes that are syncing/writing
    - More radical alternatives
        - Could the state itself be streamed into some other solution? DFuse, The Graph
    - Matthew and Thiago adds me too
- Matthew: Relay only nodes don’t need any state
    - We’ve discussed this idea some before
    - Would allow for more efficient block propagation
    - Kevin: Relevant PRs
        - [Propagate block after header validation #590](https://github.com/AntelopeIO/leap/pull/590)
        - [Parallelize Read-only Transaction Execution Design Document #130](https://github.com/eosnetworkfoundation/product/pull/130/files)

Participants (19)

  • Kevin Heifner
  • Marco Gonzalez (MachnBird Sparo)
  • Brian Hazzard
  • '@I_Seth |Boid|Animus BlockBase
  • Patrick | Aloha EOS (Patrick)
  • Daniel Keyes | EOS Nation
  • Stephen Diesel
  • Denis 🚀
  • Max_Cho :: KOREOS Owner-South Korea
  • Jeff Werner
  • '@Boidcom
  • Rakeden | WAX (Giiaaannis)
  • Thiago Canellas_EOS Rio
  • Matthew Darwin
  • Ross (EOSphere)
  • Aaron Cox
  • Dario | EOSsupport.io
  • junhank | NodeONE
  • Ted Cahall
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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant