Open richard-ramos opened 1 year ago
My understanding is that in this issue we should:
@richard-ramos is it correct?
Indeed, but i'm not entirely sure we'll be able to mitigate the issue on JS side as it seems to have been introduced in zerokit
@tyshko-rostyslav any idea why this is happening?
If indeed this commit https://github.com/vacp2p/zerokit/commit/5eb98d4b330e1107ed18c22856707110302263e4 is the reason, it's quite odd, nothing special is happening there
@tyshko-rostyslav is it possible the move from ark-circom 0.3.0 to 0.4.0 is the problem?
There was a significant slowdown, when we changed versions, specifically a lot of operations became compressed. As you've seen in this thread, I tried uncompressed versions in ark-circom 0.4, which somewhat helped, but not to the desired effect
right, I think it'd be more performant if js-rln used a similar approach to https://github.com/Rate-Limiting-Nullifier/rlnjs, maybe even use the package to avoid de-duped work. ofcourse, they use rln-v2, but an older commit will be your best bet
I need to look into how we can leverage https://github.com/Rate-Limiting-Nullifier/rlnjs
rlnjs
was not selected to be used due to fact that we needed to maintain proxy in JS code for our RLN contract and be able to optimize code in our own way.
Ice boxing this task as in future we might have a light weight way of generating / verifying proofs. Potentially we can use parts of rlnjs
for this to avoid using wasm
version of zerokit.
@adklempner @waku-org/js-waku-developers
As described in these comments: