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

miner selection improvements - part 1 (extract miner logic into a separate package) #533

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Nov 18, 2022

Conversation

en0ma
Copy link
Contributor

@en0ma en0ma commented Nov 16, 2022

The miner selection improvement will happen in multiple PRs to make code review easy.
This first PR makes no miner selection behavior changes, it basically extracted the miner logic into a separate package.

A follow-up PR will bring the actual selection behavior changes and it will be easy to code review as there will be less distraction from moving things around

Verification
I have verified deals are made, and current miner behavior was unchanged

@en0ma en0ma changed the title Chore/miner selection improvements part1 miner selection improvements - part1 Nov 16, 2022
@en0ma en0ma changed the title miner selection improvements - part1 miner selection improvements - part 1 (extract miner logic into separate package) Nov 16, 2022
@en0ma en0ma marked this pull request as ready for review November 16, 2022 11:20
@en0ma en0ma changed the title miner selection improvements - part 1 (extract miner logic into separate package) miner selection improvements - part 1 (extract miner logic into a separate package) Nov 17, 2022
@jcace
Copy link
Contributor

jcace commented Nov 17, 2022

Looks good! Much cleaner with the miner code separated out like this.

handlers.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
miner/manager.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@alvin-reyes alvin-reyes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

a few things to note:

  • we should abstract the miner selection.
  • think about adding geolocation (miners <> shuttle <> users)
  • reputation to include number of deals, location, age, uptime (heartbeat mechanism)

We can do this on another set of PRs.

Great work as usual @en0ma!

@alvin-reyes alvin-reyes merged commit 460a808 into dev Nov 18, 2022
@en0ma en0ma deleted the chore/miner-selection-improvements-part1 branch November 20, 2022 07:08
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