-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
feat: Split quorum contrib data out of evodb #5481
Conversation
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
bdf2655
to
aa34da0
Compare
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
aa34da0
to
fd02d2f
Compare
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
f5d15af
to
3bfa81e
Compare
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
Is this still targeting v21? |
b91ab70
to
f6c7c20
Compare
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.
utACK f6c7c20; this is just an implementation detail; as such I don't think it needs any release notes, and it doesn't introduce any backwards incompatibility that would require a reindex on downgrade.
Please get clang-diff happy :) |
both suggestions are unrelated imo EDIT: hmm.. there is a 3rd one, I think I did not have it locally, let me check EDIT2: I have it locally but it's unrelated too :D |
Yes; but you changed these files, so I think it's still best to add a |
I'd prefer to keep this PR focused - clang diff script shouldn't be suggesting changes to unrelated lines in the first place, it's more of a bug in this case imo. |
how are these changes not related?
|
I never touched these lines while implementing the feature. Why should I refactor them? 🤷♂️ |
|
f50f8e0
to
97d08e8
Compare
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.
utACK 97d08e8
range-diff looks good
-: ---------- > 1: fb00431b7c Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22385: refactor: Use DeploymentEnabled to hide VB deployments
-: ---------- > 2: 8928146bfa Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22550: test: improve `test_signing_with_{csv,cltv}` subtests (speed, prevent timeout)
-: ---------- > 3: cbd2be8e18 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22597: consensus/params: simplify ValidDeployment check to avoid gcc warning
-: ---------- > 4: fc25503cbc Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22632: test: Set regtest.BIP66Height = 102 to speed up tests
-: ---------- > 5: 71af8816ef Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22907: test: Avoid intermittent test failure in feature_csv_activation.py
-: ---------- > 6: 101a863399 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#16333: test: Set BIP34Height = 2 for regtest
-: ---------- > 7: adcf095ab9 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22718: doc: Add missing PR 16333 release note
-: ---------- > 8: 65b92fa093 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#21862: test: Set regtest.BIP65Height = 111 to speed up tests
-: ---------- > 9: e4e7c440f4 fix: use proper chain instead using ActiveChain for test framework
-: ---------- > 10: cb3ac4656b ci: add more hosts to Github Actions
-: ---------- > 11: 3ec0c8ca0a fix: persist coinjoin denoms and sessions options from gui over restarts
-: ---------- > 12: bf377d47e5 fix: correct is_snapshot_cs in VerifyDB
1: f6c7c20070 = 13: 59da9bc157 feat: Split quorum contribution db out of evodb
-: ---------- > 14: 97d08e8b1b refactor: make clang-format happy
ping @knst |
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.
LGTM overall, but check comments, see 6b9fb14
%d is to fix, others are nits
83bd3f9
to
ad35c1a
Compare
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.
utACK ad35c1a
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.
utACK ad35c1a
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Quorum data is not stored on-chain, it's a temporary data produced during dkg and should not be a part of evodb.
What was done?
Use new db in
llmq/
to store quorum data, migrate old data to it.How Has This Been Tested?
Run tests, run a node on testnet
Breaking Changes
n/a
Checklist: