Skip to content
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

docs: change node requirements #1868

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

docs: change node requirements #1868

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jcstein
Copy link
Member

@jcstein jcstein commented Jan 17, 2025

Overview

Updates node requirements to:

DA Layer
------------
24G Memory 
6 vCPUs
5 TiB Storage 
Cons
------------
24G Memory 
8 vCPUs
3 TiB Storage 

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Updated hardware requirements for all Celestia node types:
      • Increased RAM from 16 GB to 24 GB
      • Increased disk storage from 2 TB to 3-5 TiB
      • Increased CPU cores from quad-core to 8 cores
    • Reflects enhanced resource specifications for optimal node performance

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 17, 2025

Walkthrough

The documentation for Celestia node types has been comprehensively updated to reflect increased hardware requirements. Across multiple node-specific guides (bridge, consensus, full storage, and validator nodes), the minimum specifications have been elevated, with notable increases in RAM from 16 GB to 24 GB, CPU cores from quad-core to 8 cores, and disk storage from 2 TB to 3-5 TiB, depending on the node type.

Changes

File Changes
how-to-guides/bridge-node.md - RAM increased from 16 GB to 24 GB
- Storage increased from 2 TB to 5 TiB NVME
how-to-guides/consensus-node.md - RAM increased from 16 GB to 24 GB
- CPU cores increased from quad-core to 8 cores
- Storage increased from 2 TB to 3 TiB SSD
how-to-guides/full-storage-node.md - RAM increased from 16 GB to 24 GB
- Storage increased from 2 TB to 5 TiB NVME
how-to-guides/nodes-overview.md - Updated hardware requirements for all node types
- Consistent increases in RAM, CPU cores, and storage
how-to-guides/validator-node.md - RAM increased from 16 GB to 24 GB
- Storage increased from 2 TB to 3 TiB SSD

Possibly related issues

Poem

🐰 Nodes growing strong, hardware takes flight,
Bytes and RAM dancing with delight,
From 16 to 24, storage expands wide,
Celestia's infrastructure, a rabbit's pride!
Sync on, brave nodes, reach for the sky! 🚀


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@jcstein jcstein requested a review from aWN4Y25pa2EK January 17, 2025 23:12
Copy link
Contributor

PR Preview Action v1.6.0

🚀 View preview at
https://celestiaorg.github.io/docs-preview/pr-1868/

Built to branch main at 2025-01-17 23:14 UTC.
Preview will be ready when the GitHub Pages deployment is complete.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 2

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a888617 and 31ba787.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • how-to-guides/bridge-node.md (1 hunks)
  • how-to-guides/consensus-node.md (1 hunks)
  • how-to-guides/full-storage-node.md (1 hunks)
  • how-to-guides/nodes-overview.md (1 hunks)
  • how-to-guides/validator-node.md (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: build
🔇 Additional comments (3)
how-to-guides/nodes-overview.md (1)

39-40: Hardware requirements are consistently updated across node types.

The updated requirements align with the PR objectives:

  • DA Layer nodes (Bridge & Full storage): 24GB RAM, 8 cores, 5 TiB NVME
  • Consensus Layer nodes (Validator & Consensus): 24GB RAM, 8 cores, 3 TiB SSD

Also applies to: 46-47

how-to-guides/validator-node.md (1)

22-24: Hardware requirements match nodes-overview.md.

The updated requirements for validator nodes are consistent with the overview document.

how-to-guides/consensus-node.md (1)

24-26: Hardware requirements match nodes-overview.md.

The updated requirements for consensus nodes are consistent with the overview document.

Comment on lines +25 to +27
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **6 cores**
- Disk: **2 TB NVME Storage**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Inconsistent CPU requirement with nodes-overview.md.

The CPU requirement here is 6 cores, while nodes-overview.md specifies 8 cores for full storage nodes.

Please update the CPU requirement to match:

- CPU: **6 cores**
+ CPU: **8 cores**
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **6 cores**
- Disk: **2 TB NVME Storage**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **8 cores**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**

Comment on lines +50 to +52
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **6 cores**
- Disk: **2 TB NVME Storage**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Inconsistent CPU requirement with nodes-overview.md.

The CPU requirement here is 6 cores, while nodes-overview.md specifies 8 cores for bridge nodes.

Please update the CPU requirement to match:

- CPU: **6 cores**
+ CPU: **8 cores**
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **6 cores**
- Disk: **2 TB NVME Storage**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**
- Memory: **24 GB RAM (minimum)**
- CPU: **8 cores**
- Disk: **5 TiB NVME Storage**

@jcstein jcstein requested a review from tty47 January 17, 2025 23:55
@jcstein jcstein changed the title docs: change node reqs docs: change node requirements Jan 22, 2025
@jcstein jcstein self-assigned this Jan 22, 2025
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.

1 participant