Skip to content

Fix PeerDAS sync scoring #7352

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 72 commits into from
May 21, 2025
Merged

Conversation

dapplion
Copy link
Collaborator

Issue Addressed

Range sync will not penalize the proper peer during PeerDAS sync for invalid column errors

Proposed Changes

  • Propagate errors with enough details to figure out which block component(s) are invalid
  • Track which peer served what in range sync batches
  • Use the above two ^ to downscore the correct peers

Progress

  • Implement
  • Add tests

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 17, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

@dapplion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Last remaining CI failure is a clippy warning

error: large size difference between variants
  --> consensus/state_processing/src/per_epoch_processing/epoch_processing_summary.rs:12:1
   |
12 | /   pub enum EpochProcessingSummary<E: EthSpec> {

@dapplion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 19, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 20, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

Copy link
Member

@pawanjay176 pawanjay176 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Can start testing and fix the peer attribution in the other big sync PR

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 20, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 20, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 20, 2025

Some required checks have failed. Could you please take a look @dapplion? 🙏

Copy link

mergify bot commented May 20, 2025

All required checks have passed and there are no merge conflicts. This pull request may now be ready for another review.

@mergify mergify bot added ready-for-review The code is ready for review and removed waiting-on-author The reviewer has suggested changes and awaits thier implementation. labels May 20, 2025
@pawanjay176
Copy link
Member

@jimmygchen Merge at will

Copy link
Member

@jimmygchen jimmygchen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Thanks for pushing this through 👍

@jimmygchen jimmygchen merged commit b014675 into sigp:peerdas-devnet-7 May 21, 2025
29 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
das Data Availability Sampling ready-for-review The code is ready for review syncing
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants