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

feat: blobless blocksync #931

Closed
4 tasks
cmwaters opened this issue Jan 5, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed
4 tasks

feat: blobless blocksync #931

cmwaters opened this issue Jan 5, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@cmwaters
Copy link
Contributor

cmwaters commented Jan 5, 2023

Summary

Assuming that blobs dominate in size within a block yet aren't required for state execution, we could formulate a mode of blocksync whereby nodes request and respond with blocks in a reduced form (without any blobs). The nodes would perform some verification that the provided set of transactions in this reduced block was complete and exhaustive and simply execute and store the reduced block.

I haven't given much thought to verification. Roughly, the responding node would need to provide the transactions in share form including the padding or next share (to prove the end of transactions) and the requesting node would use the data availability header to prove inclusion of those transactions.

The benefits of such a feature are reduced bandwidth and disk space.


For Admin Use

  • Not duplicate issue
  • Appropriate labels applied
  • Appropriate contributors tagged
  • Contributor assigned/self-assigned
@evan-forbes evan-forbes modified the milestone: v2 Nov 13, 2023
@evan-forbes evan-forbes added the WS: Big Blonks 🔭 Improving consensus critical gossiping protocols label Dec 5, 2023
@evan-forbes evan-forbes removed the WS: Big Blonks 🔭 Improving consensus critical gossiping protocols label Jan 29, 2024
@cmwaters
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this as a duplicate of #994

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants