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

Implement Randomized leader election based on the VRF #1841

Merged

HoOngEe merged 13 commits into CodeChain-io:VRF-election from HoOngEe:VRF-election

Jan 28, 2020

Contributor

HoOngEe commented Nov 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

It resolves #1897

kseo requested a review from majecty

November 4, 2019 03:14

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 2 times, most recently from f016c4b to bffb073 Compare

November 4, 2019 11:02

majecty approved these changes

View reviewed changes

core/src/consensus/sortition/binom_cdf.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

core/src/consensus/sortition/lot.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

majecty added the do-not-merge label

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 8 times, most recently from c3eac7f to c85cdf9 Compare

November 7, 2019 02:58

HoOngEe requested a review from hyunsikjeong

November 7, 2019 02:59

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 7 times, most recently from baac827 to a310782 Compare

November 12, 2019 06:24

Contributor

majecty commented Nov 12, 2019 •

edited by kseo

Loading

PriorityMessage part and Account provider part look good to me.
Let's split them as a new PR and merge them!

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 2 times, most recently from cf7dfef to b9d3b52 Compare

November 18, 2019 11:34

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch from afc3964 to c23cfa3 Compare

November 22, 2019 06:44

HoOngEe removed the request for review from hyunsikjeong

November 22, 2019 06:45

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 4 times, most recently from 7add5db to 8767752 Compare

November 27, 2019 08:57

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 7 times, most recently from 82f315a to 09cf2ff Compare

January 20, 2020 09:24

Contributor

majecty commented Jan 21, 2020 •

edited

Loading

Please fix this commit message.

Change the possible tendermint states
TO accept multiple proposals and wait their imports, A new product type is required.

TO -> To, wait -> wait for

Also, what do you mean by the term "product type"?

majecty requested changes

View reviewed changes

core/src/consensus/tendermint/worker.rs

@@ @@ -708,7 +703,7 @@ impl Worker { @@
                       // need to reset vote
                       self.broadcast_state(
                           vote_step,
-                          self.proposal.block_hash(),
+                          self.votes.get_highest_proposal_summary(self.current_sortition_round()),

Contributor

majecty Jan 21, 2020

I had a concern about this line. The concern is how to handle the highest proposal block if the block was invalid. There are many strategies to make a better situation.

However, we can think of a situation like this. A proposer is elected by the VRF. The proposer chooses not to create a block.

Contributor Author

HoOngEe Jan 22, 2020

If validators are elected as eligible proposers but they send invalid proposal block then all validators may agree on Nil. I think this is natural behavior.

core/src/consensus/tendermint/worker.rs Outdated

+                              vrf_seed_info: Box::new(current_seed),
+                          }
+                      } else {
+                          cwarn!(ENGINE, "Seal request for an old view");

Contributor

majecty Jan 21, 2020

Let's use cdebug! here. Also, let's change the log message.
This else case is executed when there is a proposal that has a higher score.

Contributor Author

HoOngEe Jan 22, 2020

Modified the message

core/src/consensus/tendermint/network.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch from 09cf2ff to dab125d Compare

January 22, 2020 08:42

HoOngEe added 2 commits

January 22, 2020 17:43


          Introduce randomized leader election to worker

2beb9b3


          Replace request_proposal_to_any to request_proposal_to_superiors

128c952

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch from dab125d to 67569ea Compare

January 22, 2020 08:44

majecty requested changes

View reviewed changes

core/src/consensus/tendermint/worker.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

core/src/consensus/tendermint/backup.rs

-                      finalized_view_of_current_block: Option<View>,
-                  }
+              fn load_with_version<T: Decodable>(db: &dyn KeyValueDB) -> Option<T> {

Contributor

majecty Jan 23, 2020

Wow, it is a fantastic way to load data.

core/src/consensus/tendermint/worker.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch 2 times, most recently from 7ecb713 to c644eab Compare

January 23, 2020 09:27

Contributor Author

HoOngEe commented Jan 23, 2020

I changed the commit message on the commit Change the possible tendermint states

majecty reviewed

View reviewed changes

core/src/consensus/tendermint/worker.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch from c644eab to 3752da6 Compare

January 23, 2020 11:34

HoOngEe added 7 commits

January 23, 2020 20:50


          Change the possible tendermint states

c97a9a2

To accept multiple proposals and wait for their imports, I introduced
a new type for TendermintState::Propose.


          Fix testhelper types

d40b1f6


          Modify Backup and Restore

de53612


          Switch jail function by CommonParams

a235991


          Fix the test code

3f0524c


          Remove needless weight data from Validator

ad6cd26

In randomized leader election environment, CodeChain doesn't need
to manage weight values. Previously, it is utilized to guarantee
stake-proportional leader election but now the property comes from
the nature of the probability model.


          Add logging to get statistics

6cbf36a

HoOngEe force-pushed the VRF-election branch from 3752da6 to 6cbf36a Compare

January 23, 2020 11:50

majecty approved these changes

View reviewed changes

HoOngEe merged commit 5b74d99 into CodeChain-io:VRF-election

HoOngEe deleted the VRF-election branch

January 28, 2020 03:15

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels