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

R4R: Aggressive slashing simulation & fixes #2430

Merged
merged 58 commits into from
Oct 5, 2018

Conversation

cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

@cwgoes cwgoes commented Oct 3, 2018

Depends on #2255

Closes #2396
Closes #2225
Closes #2224

Does not yet solve #2372 because the cause of that issue is not yet clear.

Usual checklist:

  • Linked to github-issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
  • Wrote tests
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/)
  • Added entries in PENDING.md with issue #
  • rereviewed Files changed in the github PR explorer

For Admin Use:

  • Added appropriate labels to PR (ex. wip, ready-for-review, docs)
  • Reviewers Assigned
  • Squashed all commits, uses message "Merge pull request #XYZ: [title]" (coding standards)

cwgoes and others added 30 commits September 11, 2018 18:26
@cwgoes cwgoes mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2018
5 tasks
@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwgoes commented Oct 3, 2018

Ref #2305 (comment)

@cwgoes cwgoes changed the base branch from rigel/stake-refactor to develop October 3, 2018 16:37
@cwgoes cwgoes requested a review from zramsay as a code owner October 3, 2018 16:38
@cwgoes cwgoes force-pushed the cwgoes/aggressive-slashing-simulation branch from 3da9957 to 74e4a40 Compare October 3, 2018 16:39
@cwgoes cwgoes force-pushed the cwgoes/aggressive-slashing-simulation branch from 74e4a40 to 9a4249e Compare October 3, 2018 16:40
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 5, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #2430 into cwgoes/nextvalset will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@                Coverage Diff                 @@
##           cwgoes/nextvalset    #2430   +/-   ##
==================================================
  Coverage              59.71%   59.71%           
==================================================
  Files                    136      136           
  Lines                   8410     8410           
==================================================
  Hits                    5022     5022           
  Misses                  3055     3055           
  Partials                 333      333

@cwgoes cwgoes changed the base branch from develop to cwgoes/nextvalset October 5, 2018 14:36
@cwgoes cwgoes changed the title WIP: Aggressive slashing simulation & fixes R4R: Aggressive slashing simulation & fixes Oct 5, 2018
@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwgoes commented Oct 5, 2018

Ready for review but dependent on #2255.

Copy link
Contributor

@rigelrozanski rigelrozanski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

simple change 👍

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ const (
numKeys int = 250

// Chance that double-signing evidence is found on a given block
evidenceFraction float64 = 0.01
evidenceFraction float64 = 0.5
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We probably should randomize this. Also .5 seems a bit too high lol.

Setting a high evidence fraction isn't sufficient tho, since it executes a different code path than liveness (Or in this bloxk) slashes

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Doesn't block this PR, it lgtm!

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwgoes commented Oct 5, 2018

scripts/multisim.sh 500 (500-block multi-seed simulation) passes locally.

@cwgoes cwgoes merged commit 482537e into cwgoes/nextvalset Oct 5, 2018
@cwgoes cwgoes deleted the cwgoes/aggressive-slashing-simulation branch October 5, 2018 17:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants