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

[ETCM-23] Add etc fork blocks to config #642

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 25, 2020

Conversation

KonradStaniec
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@KonradStaniec KonradStaniec force-pushed the etcm-23-add-etc-fork-blocks branch from b2f0d90 to 9c88978 Compare August 24, 2020 11:16
@KonradStaniec KonradStaniec requested a review from mmrozek August 24, 2020 11:41
@KonradStaniec KonradStaniec marked this pull request as ready for review August 24, 2020 12:56
Copy link
Contributor

@mmrozek mmrozek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@@ -518,7 +504,7 @@ mantis {
block-cache-size = 33554432
}

# Define which database to use [leveldb, rocksdb], iodb is not currently used
# Define which database to use [rocksdb], iodb is not currently used
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need that anymore?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

probably not, but I would leave it as it is for now (as it is not critical). We can improve it later, when we will have working sync.

@KonradStaniec KonradStaniec merged commit 9c88978 into phase/etc_forks Aug 25, 2020
@KonradStaniec KonradStaniec deleted the etcm-23-add-etc-fork-blocks branch August 25, 2020 08:04
@ntallar ntallar mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2020
13 tasks
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.

2 participants