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

SIMD-0185: Vote Account v4 #185

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jstarry
Copy link
Contributor

@jstarry jstarry commented Oct 17, 2024

No description provided.

@jstarry jstarry changed the title SIMD-XXXX: Vote Account v4 SIMD-0185: Vote Account v4 Oct 17, 2024
`authorized_voters` field that correspond to epochs less than the current epoch,
only purge entries less than the previous epoch (current epoch - 1). This will
mean that the `authorized_voters` field can now hold up to 4 entries for the
epochs in the range `[current_epoch - 1, current_epoch + 2]`. Keeping the
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is there a reason we need to store current_epoch + 2?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's the current design and I think it kinda makes sense because otherwise you could set a new authorized voter at the end of an epoch and immediately start using it in the next block in the new epoch and leaders would need an up to date view on any new authorized voters for each fork crossing the epoch boundary

@diman-io
Copy link

I'm sorry, why is block_tips_collector here? Are tips somehow planned in the protocol level / voting program?

@jstarry
Copy link
Contributor Author

jstarry commented Oct 23, 2024

I'm sorry, why is block_tips_collector here? Are tips somehow planned in the protocol level / voting program?

Up for debate still, but I put it there for now since it's easier to update the vote account all in one go. If that field remains unused by the protocol it can be used for something else in the future.

@diman-io
Copy link

Is this about a new instruction to pay the leader who landed a successful transaction?

Copy link

@segfaultdoc segfaultdoc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Overall good proposal, trying to think longer term if the Tips commission piece makes sense or becomes obsolete

@jstarry
Copy link
Contributor Author

jstarry commented Nov 5, 2024

I updated the proposal to use basis points for commission values and to remove any special handling for block tips for now.

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.

5 participants