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

Simulation: Use Consensus Params #5988

Closed
2 of 4 tasks
alexanderbez opened this issue Apr 13, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6002
Closed
2 of 4 tasks

Simulation: Use Consensus Params #5988

alexanderbez opened this issue Apr 13, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6002
Assignees

Comments

@alexanderbez
Copy link
Contributor

alexanderbez commented Apr 13, 2020

Summary

The InitChain request in initChain function call during simulation does not contain any consensus parameters (block, evidence, and validator).

Problem Definition

To improve the soundness and breadth of coverage in simulation, the simulator should account for and include consensus parameters in the initChain function call.

Proposal

Include consensus parameters in the initChain function call. Block and Validator parameters should be straightforward to generate - they can be randomly generated within a range as the initChain function already accepts an *rand.Rand argument.

However, the evidence parameters should be based on the trusting period (i.e. unbonding period) which resides in the app state defined in x/staking. Since app state is also already provided as an argument to initChain, we can decode and find the value.

/cc @fedekunze


For Admin Use

  • Not duplicate issue
  • Appropriate labels applied
  • Appropriate contributors tagged
  • Contributor assigned/self-assigned
@alexanderbez
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jgimeno if you want to start exploring how the simulator works, this would be a good issue to pick up and tackle ;-)

@jgimeno jgimeno self-assigned this Apr 13, 2020
@alessio
Copy link
Contributor

alessio commented Apr 14, 2020

I agree, @jgimeno this'd be quite a learning experience. Go ahead please

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants