You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The general idea was that with #186, we're able to be non-deterministic while executing state mutation calls on the author node, and with #194, all those non-deterministic data would be baked into the broadcast to aid other nodes in arriving at the same state.
One interesting case I just thought about is - for example, time dependence.
Say, at the start of some function call, I get the current timestamp, run through a couple of loops, pull the current timestamp, compute the difference, and then commit that to the state.
Naturally, I'd expect some variance with something like this being executed on different machines.
This is of course solved by #194 tracking all the non-deterministic sources to eventually be baked into the transaction.
Might come down to changing our update propagation model to distributing the diff of the "state update" instead of just the "state transition", worth investigating. #272
This discussion was converted from issue #271 on July 01, 2024 12:10.
Heading
Bold
Italic
Quote
Code
Link
Numbered list
Unordered list
Task list
Attach files
Mention
Reference
Menu
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
The general idea was that with #186, we're able to be non-deterministic while executing state mutation calls on the author node, and with #194, all those non-deterministic data would be baked into the broadcast to aid other nodes in arriving at the same state.
One interesting case I just thought about is - for example, time dependence.
Say, at the start of some function call, I get the current timestamp, run through a couple of loops, pull the current timestamp, compute the difference, and then commit that to the state.
Naturally, I'd expect some variance with something like this being executed on different machines.
This is of course solved by #194 tracking all the non-deterministic sources to eventually be baked into the transaction.
We need to investigate how this plays with #190.
Might come down to changing our update propagation model to distributing the diff of the "state update" instead of just the "state transition", worth investigating. #272
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions