-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
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
future possibilities and consequences #548
Conversation
neps/nep-0509.md
Outdated
|
||
### Negative | ||
|
||
- n1 | ||
- The hardware requirements will increase. In particular the network bandwidth and memory requirements will be higher. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmm wonder if we should mention potential decrease of hardware requirement (disk requirement?) as well in positive section
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1 - more specifically, small-stake nodes won't have to store state and apply chunks for all shards as they currently do.
- n1 | ||
- The hardware requirements will increase. In particular the network bandwidth and memory requirements will be higher. | ||
- Additional limits will be put on the size of transactions, receipts and, more generally, cross shard communication. | ||
- The dependency on cloud state sync will increase the centralization of the blockchain. This will be resolved separately by the decentralized state sync. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we specify what it starts having a dependency on state sync?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, it's mentioned above on explanation of validator roles.
@walnut-the-cat and @Longarithm I added the suggestion and I'm going to merge it now. Feel free to add any more comments and suggestions and I'll just do it in a follow up PR. |
No description provided.