-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 974
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
Add BeaconBlocksByRange v3 #3845
Open
dapplion
wants to merge
4
commits into
ethereum:dev
Choose a base branch
from
dapplion:range-by-branch
base: dev
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
Is this intended to be the last block in the segment (start_slot + count)? Or just a block anywhere in the segment
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.
I'm guessing this is intended to be the target block to sync to?
which could be either greater, equal or less than
(start_slot + count)
but greater than or equal to thestart_slot
e.g. target block_root
0xabcde
(at slot 50)start_slot: 0, count: 32
: valid and returns block for slots 0-31start_slot: 32, count: 32
: valid and returns block for slots 32-50start_slot: 64, count: 32
: invalid requestIn the 2nd case above, the block
0xabcde
is the last block in the segment.If the above is correct, perhaps this can be renamed to
target_block_root
?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.
I have updated the definition for
block_root
to refer to a block that's at the tip or descendant of the request slot range 06fb7a0 for the block range to be uniquely identifiableblock_root
must not be less thanstart_slot + count
, that was an oversight on my end.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.
@jimmygchen I like the suggestion to use a more descriptive name than
block_root
. Howevertarget
is overloaded with the CasperFFG checkpoint meaning.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.
I'm thinking that maybe we should just start from the end slot and go back to the ancestors rather than starting from the start slot and go down to the descendants. How about changing the entire request content to the following?
The request will be valid only if
block_root
is in the slotend_slot
.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.
I feel it's an unnecessary departure to how by_range requests are done today