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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

migrations: take()should consume read and write operation weight #4302

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 12, 2024
Merged

migrations: take()should consume read and write operation weight #4302

merged 5 commits into from
May 12, 2024

Conversation

dastansam
Copy link
Contributor

Problem

take() consumes only 1 read worth of weight in single-block-migrations example, while take() is get() + kill(), i.e should be 1 read + 1 write. I think this could mislead developers who follow this example to write their migrations

@dastansam dastansam requested a review from a team as a code owner April 25, 2024 22:32
dastansam
dastansam commented Apr 25, 2024
View reviewed changes
prdoc/pr_4302.prdoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@paritytech-cicd-pr
Copy link

The CI pipeline was cancelled due to failure one of the required jobs.
Job name: test-linux-stable 1/3
Logs: https://gitlab.parity.io/parity/mirrors/polkadot-sdk/-/jobs/6065203

@liamaharon liamaharon added the T2-pallets This PR/Issue is related to a particular pallet. label Apr 26, 2024
ggwpez
ggwpez approved these changes Apr 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ggwpez ggwpez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it depends on the Trie version, but okay. Many chains are still on V0.

@bkchr bkchr enabled auto-merge May 12, 2024 22:05
@bkchr bkchr added this pull request to the merge queue May 12, 2024
Merged via the queue into paritytech:master with commit efc2132 May 12, 2024
146 of 148 checks passed
@dastansam dastansam deleted the take-weight-correction branch May 13, 2024 07:53
ordian added a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2024
@ordian
Merge branch 'master' into ao-statement-distribution-reenabling-prep
fe4ea5f 
* master:
  improve MockValidationDataInherentDataProvider to support async backing (#4442)
  Bump `proc-macro-crate` to the latest version (#4409)
  [ci] Run check-runtime-migration in GHA (#4441)
  prospective-parachains rework (#4035)
  [ci] Add forklift to GHA ARC (#4372)
  `CheckWeight` SE: Check for extrinsic length + proof size combined (#4326)
  Add generate and verify logic for `AncestryProof` (#4430)
  Rococo AH: undeploy trie migration (#4414)
  Remove `substrate-frame-cli` (#4403)
  migrations: `take()`should consume read and write operation weight (#4302)
  `remote-externalities`: store block header in snapshot (#4349)
  xcm-emlator: Use `BlockNumberFor` instead of `parachains_common::BlockNumber=u32` (#4434)
  Remove `pallet::getter` usage from authority-discovery pallet (#4091)
  Remove pallet::getter usage from pallet-contracts-mock-network (#4417)
  Add docs to request_core_count (#4423)
hitchhooker pushed a commit to ibp-network/polkadot-sdk that referenced this pull request Jun 5, 2024
@dastansam @bkchr @hitchhooker
migrations: take()should consume read and write operation weight (p…
f2921e8 
…aritytech#4302)

#### Problem
`take()` consumes only 1 read worth of weight in
`single-block-migrations` example, while `take()`
[is](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/blob/master/substrate/frame/support/src/storage/unhashed.rs#L63)
`get() + kill()`, i.e should be 1 read + 1 write. I think this could
mislead developers who follow this example to write their migrations

---------

Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
liuchengxu pushed a commit to liuchengxu/polkadot-sdk that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2024
@dastansam @bkchr @liuchengxu
migrations: take()should consume read and write operation weight (p…
4b01221 
…aritytech#4302)

#### Problem
`take()` consumes only 1 read worth of weight in
`single-block-migrations` example, while `take()`
[is](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/blob/master/substrate/frame/support/src/storage/unhashed.rs#L63)
`get() + kill()`, i.e should be 1 read + 1 write. I think this could
mislead developers who follow this example to write their migrations

---------

Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
TarekkMA pushed a commit to moonbeam-foundation/polkadot-sdk that referenced this pull request Aug 2, 2024
@dastansam @bkchr @TarekkMA
migrations: take()should consume read and write operation weight (p…
a30cc04 
…aritytech#4302)

#### Problem
`take()` consumes only 1 read worth of weight in
`single-block-migrations` example, while `take()`
[is](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/blob/master/substrate/frame/support/src/storage/unhashed.rs#L63)
`get() + kill()`, i.e should be 1 read + 1 write. I think this could
mislead developers who follow this example to write their migrations

---------

Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
This was referenced Aug 21, 2024
Open
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@liamaharon liamaharon liamaharon approved these changes

@ggwpez ggwpez ggwpez approved these changes

@bkchr bkchr bkchr approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
T2-pallets This PR/Issue is related to a particular pallet.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@dastansam @paritytech-cicd-pr @bkchr @ggwpez @liamaharon