Skip to content

feat!: confirm short freezing threshold #4203

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 19, 2025

Conversation

sesi200
Copy link
Contributor

@sesi200 sesi200 commented Apr 11, 2025

Description

Setting very short freezing thresholds can be dangerous as it may lead to canisters suddenly getting uninstalled with little warning when cycles run low. This PR introduces the --confirm-very-short-freezing-threshold flag when setting freezing thresholds below 1 week / 604_000 seconds.

Fixes SDK-2079

How Has This Been Tested?

Added e2e

Checklist:

  • The title of this PR complies with Conventional Commits.
  • I have edited the CHANGELOG accordingly.
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.

@sesi200 sesi200 marked this pull request as ready for review May 15, 2025 11:14
@sesi200 sesi200 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 15, 2025 11:14
@sesi200 sesi200 enabled auto-merge (squash) May 15, 2025 11:21
@@ -1208,10 +1208,11 @@ You can specify the following options for the `dfx canister update-settings` com
| `--add-log-viewer <principal>` | Add a principal to the list of log viewers of the canister. Can be specified more than once to add multiple log viewers. If current log visibility is `public` or `controllers`, it will be changed to the custom allowed viewer list. |
| `-c`, `--compute-allocation <allocation>` | Specifies the canister's compute allocation. This should be a percent in the range [0..100]. |
| `--confirm-very-long-freezing-threshold` | Freezing thresholds above ~1.5 years require this option as confirmation. |
| `--confirm-very-short-freezing-threshold` | Freezing thresholds below 1 week require this option as confirmation. |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I really think we only need one combined --confirm-freezing-threshold for both --confirm-very-long-freezing-threshold and --confirm-very-short-freezing-threshold. I'm fine with adding the new --confirm-very-short-freezing-threshold only for backward compatibility...

@sesi200 sesi200 merged commit 51c0e21 into master May 19, 2025
111 checks passed
@sesi200 sesi200 deleted the severin/confirm-short-freezing-threshold branch May 19, 2025 11:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants