[consensus] Add consensus::aggregation
#974
Conversation
bcc3600 to
4321ffb
Compare
3e34e05 to
0bbdbea
Compare
83bc6d4 to
01039b6
Compare
|
I think this one will realllllly benefit from #1002 ❤️ (sorry I thought this would go out as a review comment lol) |
consensus/src/aggregation/mod.rs
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,1093 @@ | |||
| //! Threshold signature aggregation for agreeing on externally-finalized hashes. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Recover threshold signatures over an externally synchronized stream of digests.
I suppose the "aggregation" here is really what we'd call recovery (and it would be aggregation in a multi-signature case). 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
...now second guessing the name aggregation lol
consensus/src/aggregation/wire.rs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In other consensus crates, we combine types and wire. Curious if you feel it is better to separate (I've taken the position that anything in types may be serialized somewhere and sent over the wire so delineation doesn't add anything).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's better to keep them separate. Just easier to see the direct types that you are expected to send over the wire or not
77f9b4c to
29ba1c5
Compare
ecfa97e to
a14e04d
Compare
| // Refresh the epoch | ||
| debug!(current=self.epoch, new=epoch, "refresh epoch"); | ||
| assert!(epoch >= self.epoch); | ||
| self.epoch = epoch; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unlike ordered-broadcast, I suspect epoch will be rigidly associated with a range of indices.
We "should" be ok gathering signatures from the current epoch on any historical data (and need to for liveness) but just calling out as a point of discussion.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #974 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 91.39% 91.04% -0.36%
==========================================
Files 218 245 +27
Lines 59455 59775 +320
==========================================
+ Hits 54338 54420 +82
- Misses 5117 5355 +238
... and 188 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Fixes #814
TODO
Future Work
Activityemission for conflicts #1084ordered-broadcastandaggregation#1002