Skip to content

[tmpnet] Switch back to using maps for subnet config #3877

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 1 commit into from
Apr 14, 2025

Conversation

maru-ava
Copy link
Contributor

@maru-ava maru-ava commented Apr 11, 2025

PR Chain: tmpnet+kube

This PR chain enables tmpnet to deploy temporary networks to Kubernetes. Early PRs refactor tmpnet to support the addition in #3615 of a new tmpnet node runtime for kube.

Why this should be merged

Using subnet.Config to define subnet configuration initially seemed like a good idea - typing for the win - but went down in flames due to a combination the semantics of JSON marshaling and how subnet config defaults are set by the node. So, back to maps we go.

How this was tested

CI

Need to be documented in RELEASES.md?

N/A

@maru-ava maru-ava added the testing This primarily focuses on testing label Apr 11, 2025
@maru-ava maru-ava self-assigned this Apr 11, 2025
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Backlog 🗄️ in avalanchego Apr 11, 2025
Using subnet.Config to define subnet configuration initially seemed
like a good idea - typing for the win - but went down in flames due to
a combination the semantics of JSON marshaling and how subnet config
defaults are set by the node. So, back to maps we go.
@maru-ava maru-ava force-pushed the subnet-config-consensus-pointer branch from 7c40100 to 8eeca7f Compare April 11, 2025 00:03
Comment on lines +36 to +39
Config: tmpnet.FlagsMap{
// Reducing this from the 1s default speeds up tx acceptance
"proposerMinBlockDelay": 0,
},
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this a no-op?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not a no-op - the default is 1s.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why include a non no-op config change in this PR? Just looking to understand here

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This addition ensures tmpnet usage of subnet configuration for non-primary subnets.

Copy link
Collaborator

@aaronbuchwald aaronbuchwald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM - couple of questions about whether or not some changes in tests are still no-ops in this PR

@maru-ava maru-ava requested a review from felipemadero April 14, 2025 15:10
@maru-ava maru-ava moved this from Backlog 🗄️ to In Review 👀 in avalanchego Apr 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
testing This primarily focuses on testing
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants