-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 234
Disable blobs in EL #376
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Disable blobs in EL #376
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -33,8 +33,9 @@ services: | |
| --Metrics.Enabled=true | ||
| --Metrics.ExposePort=8008 | ||
| --Sync.SnapSync=true | ||
| --Sync.AncientBodiesBarrier=4367322 | ||
| --Sync.AncientReceiptsBarrier=4367322 | ||
| --Sync.AncientBodiesBarrier=${NETHERMIND_ANCIENT_BODIES_BARRIER:-0} | ||
| --Sync.AncientReceiptsBarrier=${NETHERMIND_ANCIENT_RECEIPTS_BARRIER:-0} | ||
| --TxPool.BlobsSupport=Disabled | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I have a new concern about this. IIUC, an update was made to allow a CL to fetch blobs from a local ELs mempool. analysis showed that 30-70% of all blobs get imported this way depending on the client. Disabling the blobpool may hurt performance more than we gain from not proposing blobs in the rare case of a local block. Maybe nethermind will separate this behaviours into a different flag. we probably shouldn't turn on this feature if my concern is valid, will try and dig up the reference i remember on twitter.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. NethermindEth/nethermind#9686. Nethermind addressed this for us :D |
||
| networks: [dvnode] | ||
| volumes: | ||
| - ./data/nethermind:/nethermind/data | ||
|
|
@@ -68,6 +69,7 @@ services: | |
| --http.addr=0.0.0.0 | ||
| --http.port=8545 | ||
| --metrics=0.0.0.0:8008 | ||
| --txpool.blobpool-max-count=0 | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. |
||
| networks: [dvnode] | ||
| volumes: | ||
| - ./data/reth:/reth/data | ||
|
|
||

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.
Setting 0 would mean downloading the full chain. shouldnt we bump this to like 20000000 or higher? (currently at 23.7m on mainnet)
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.
Digging a little further, does it make sense to prune history with this flag

and maybe we need a pruning trigger too? not clear to me if pruning will happen without one? (doesn't seem right that it wouldn't unless this is set, so maybe i don't understand, maybe its the difference between in-memory pruning vs full pruning, which is what hybrid offers)
