Skip to content

test: v20 earlier activation for regtest #5668

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
PastaPastaPasta merged 3 commits into from
Nov 7, 2023
Merged

test: v20 earlier activation for regtest #5668

PastaPastaPasta merged 3 commits into from
Nov 7, 2023

Conversation

@ogabrielides
Copy link

@ogabrielides ogabrielides commented Nov 2, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

Currently, on functional tests v20 activates at height 1440 which is later than needed.

What was done?

Reduced the window size of v20 from 480 to 400 which activates v20 at 1200.
Adjusted tests to this change.

Note regarding the window analysis for MN payments in feature_llmq_evo.py (reduced from 256 to 48 blocks):
48 window is enough to analyse 4 MNs and 5 EvoNodes (Weighted count=24)

On my machine using develop:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 145.45s user 30.00s system 68% cpu 4:16.93 total

With this PR:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 119.26s user 24.61s system 62% cpu 3:50.89 total

How Has This Been Tested?

all tests

Breaking Changes

no

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone (for repository code-owners and collaborators only)

@ogabrielides ogabrielides added this to the 20 milestone Nov 2, 2023
@ogabrielides ogabrielides marked this pull request as draft November 2, 2023 16:04
@ogabrielides ogabrielides marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2023 09:44
@UdjinM6
Copy link

UdjinM6 commented Nov 3, 2023

I don't understand.... Can you clarify a couple of things pls?

which is later than needed.

needed for what?

On my machine using develop:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 119.26s user 24.61s system 62% cpu 3:50.89 total

With this PR:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 145.45s user 30.00s system 68% cpu 4:16.93 total

so we mine less blocks but it's slower now? how so?

knst
knst previously approved these changes Nov 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK

test/functional/feature_cltv.py Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst Nov 3, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

note for reviewers: if this PR would be merged after #5658 need to replace -1 to 0 so far as MNActivationHeight is refactored to flag useEHF.

Suggested change
'-vbparams=v20:0:999999999999:480:384:288:5:-1' # Delay v20 for this test as we don't need it
'-vbparams=v20:0:999999999999:480:384:288:5:0' # Delay v20 for this test as we don't need it

Copy link
Author

@ogabrielides ogabrielides Nov 7, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@knst Since this one was merged, adjust feature_cltv.py on #5658

@ogabrielides
Copy link
Author

ogabrielides commented Nov 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

I don't understand.... Can you clarify a couple of things pls?

which is later than needed.

needed for what?

On my machine using develop:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 119.26s user 24.61s system 62% cpu 3:50.89 total
With this PR:
python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 145.45s user 30.00s system 68% cpu 4:16.93 total

so we mine less blocks but it's slower now? how so?

Sorry, the faster time is with this PR and the slower using develop. I mistyped the description. Fixed it
And the purpose of this PR is to make faster the functional tests that wait for v20 activation.

@ogabrielides ogabrielides mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2023
Merged
5 tasks
@ogabrielides
Copy link
Author

ogabrielides commented Nov 3, 2023

Would need to rebase if #5665 gets merged first.

@UdjinM6
Copy link

UdjinM6 commented Nov 6, 2023

LGTM but I think I'd prefer #5658 to be merged first

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 6, 2023

This pull request has conflicts, please rebase.

knst
knst approved these changes Nov 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

re-utACK

PastaPastaPasta
PastaPastaPasta approved these changes Nov 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK for squash merge

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit c293593 into dashpay:develop Nov 7, 2023
@ogabrielides ogabrielides deleted the v20_earlier_activation_regtest branch November 7, 2023 16:20
knst added a commit to knst/dash that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2023
@knst
follow-up dashpay#5668 - correct flags for params
6b7f514
@knst knst mentioned this pull request Nov 7, 2023
Merged
5 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@knst knst knst approved these changes

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta approved these changes

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 Awaiting requested review from UdjinM6

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

20

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@ogabrielides @UdjinM6 @knst @PastaPastaPasta