Open SkidanovAlex opened 5 years ago
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity in the last 2 months. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity in the last 2 months. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity in the last 2 months. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity in the last 2 months. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
Currently during fast sync we do not move header head.
The reason for that appears to be due to implementation details, specifically
HeaderSync
andStateSync
are two mutually exclusive modes of operation. It seems like nothing would break if we sync headers while syncing state, just need to refactor code to support it.We need to continue updating the header head, because if the header head runs two epochs from the state sync head, we don't have a reliable way of determining peers that can serve state to do the state sync, and the state sync can stall.
Once implemented, test that the logic in the
client.rs
that restarts the state sync once the header head is two epochs ahead actually works.