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

Simplifications #1789

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Aug 13, 2019
Merged

Simplifications #1789

merged 14 commits into from
Aug 13, 2019

Conversation

pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor

@pmconrad pmconrad commented Jun 9, 2019

Resolves #1584 and #998
Requires additional changes in FC: bitshares/bitshares-fc#137

Measured 8% speedup for replaying 33M blocks

@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Snapshot comparison at 38M produces empty diff.

@abitmore
Copy link
Member

Good job. Looks good so far.

@pmconrad pmconrad marked this pull request as ready for review June 19, 2019 17:10
@pmconrad pmconrad force-pushed the 1584_simplifications branch from 8c45488 to 734562b Compare June 19, 2019 17:48
@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebase to avoid conflict

@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased.
Apparently Mac and Windows builds require additional changes, see bitshares/bitshares-fc#140

Copy link
Member

@abitmore abitmore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good so far.

Copy link
Contributor

@jmjatlanta jmjatlanta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note: the new "sign_message" formatter in libraries/wallet/wallet.cpp uses r.signature->data, which will not compile with these changes. The same problem exists in tests/cli/main.cpp. Perhaps rebase?

Now that FC changes are merged in, I believe an FC bump is in order.

@@ -442,7 +440,7 @@ void database::initialize_budget_record( fc::time_point_sec now, budget_record&
budget_u128 += ((uint64_t(1) << GRAPHENE_CORE_ASSET_CYCLE_RATE_BITS) - 1);
budget_u128 >>= GRAPHENE_CORE_ASSET_CYCLE_RATE_BITS;
if( budget_u128 < reserve.value )
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This generates a signed/unsigned comparison warning on gcc 7.4.0, not the fault of this PR though.

@@ -497,7 +495,7 @@ void database::process_budget()
if( worker_budget_u128 >= available_funds.value )
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This generates a signed/unsigned comparison warning on gcc 7.4.0, not the fault of this PR though.

@pmconrad pmconrad force-pushed the 1584_simplifications branch from f96b351 to b9614a4 Compare August 13, 2019 15:00
@jmjatlanta jmjatlanta dismissed their stale review August 13, 2019 16:21

Issues have been fixed

Copy link
Contributor

@jmjatlanta jmjatlanta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great work. Thanks!

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.

3 participants