-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 324
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(spartan): run full nodes along side validators #12335
Conversation
3b56cdb
to
b56c1a4
Compare
@@ -206,15 +206,9 @@ spec: | |||
- name: COINBASE | |||
value: "{{ .Values.bootNode.coinbaseAddress }}" | |||
- name: VALIDATOR_DISABLED | |||
value: "{{ .Values.bootNode.validator.disabled }}" | |||
value: "true" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm kind of telling myself that once Phil's pr goes in with the bootnode stuff, we can just change this service to be pure p2p bootstrap, and have a separate job that does l1 deployments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Big plus one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think once the p2p bootstrap goes in we need to think about how to really get in here and do a refactor, make sure stuff still makes sense, etc.
Yep big agree, it's my plan next to focus on speeding it up and stripping it down |
Calldata gets too big when adding 400 validators to the set at once with the cheatcode,
We dont need all of the validators as there is only 48 per committee, we are better off scaling the number of nodes. This adds configuration to add nodes who are not vals, who will take part in the in networking stack