You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Based on the results above the factor would be 2x. However I propose to discount it and
use 1.2x because we are comparing a highly optimized cgo implementation of secp256k1 to
a go stdlib secp256r1. In other benchmark we found that ported secp256k1 to stdlib based
implementation wold be 20x slower.
I wrote the comment above while being sick. the secp256r1 is 2.7 times faster, not slower. So will use 0.5 factor for the gas fee compared to secp256k1.
Summary
In #7718 we are adding
secp256r1
to the SDK.In #8415 we implemented address generation algorithm for custom schemes.
Here, we want to enable
secp256r1
inCheckTx
validation of antehandlers.For Admin Use
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: