Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.

Adding Fallback on election failure #5093

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Mar 26, 2022
Merged

Adding Fallback on election failure #5093

merged 12 commits into from
Mar 26, 2022

Conversation

georgesdib
Copy link
Contributor

@georgesdib georgesdib commented Mar 12, 2022

Companion to paritytech/substrate#10988

Use the newly introduced BoundedOnchainExecution , and UnboundedOnchainExecution for Genesis.

@kianenigma @emostov

Use the newly introduced `BoundedOnChainSequentialPhragmen`
and `UnboundedOnChainSequentialPhragmen`
@georgesdib georgesdib marked this pull request as ready for review March 14, 2022 20:35
Georges Dib and others added 4 commits March 19, 2022 20:42
from `frame_election_provider_support::onchain`
Renaming to have a shorter name
And `UnboundedOnchainExecution` -> `UnboundedExecution`
Copy link
Contributor

@kianenigma kianenigma left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

type Fallback in our production networks should remain NoFallback since we don't quite know what are some good bounds.

As for the GovernanceFallback as well, since this transaction can impose its own limits, I think actually for now we should set it to UnboundedExecution, because we don't know any 'reasonable static bounds' that we can assign to any BoundedExecution type.

The missing step to figure all of this out is to create an accurate weight function for all of this Solver implementations, will make an issue for it.

`UnboundedExecution` for `GovernanceFallback`
@georgesdib
Copy link
Contributor Author

type Fallback in our production networks should remain NoFallback since we don't quite know what are some good bounds.

As for the GovernanceFallback as well, since this transaction can impose its own limits, I think actually for now we should set it to UnboundedExecution, because we don't know any 'reasonable static bounds' that we can assign to any BoundedExecution type.

The missing step to figure all of this out is to create an accurate weight function for all of this Solver implementations, will make an issue for it.

I have reverted the changes including for Westend.

@paritytech-processbot
Copy link

Waiting for commit status.

@kianenigma
Copy link
Contributor

@georgesdib thanks for making the bot work with your fork, helps with the automated process.

@paritytech-processbot
Copy link

Merge cancelled due to error. Error: Checks failed for e179ded

@kianenigma
Copy link
Contributor

Must look into why and how this caused benchmarks to break.

Alternatively, we can merge this to keep the normal build of master working.

@georgesdib
Copy link
Contributor Author

georgesdib commented Mar 26, 2022

Must look into why and how this caused benchmarks to break.

Alternatively, we can merge this to keep the normal build of master working.

You think it's caused by the changes here? I tried to go back in time and see merged PRs from 2 days ago, and they seem to fail the same thing.

An example #5183

#5188 seems to be discussing it as well.

@kianenigma kianenigma added A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. B0-silent Changes should not be mentioned in any release notes C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. D5-nicetohaveaudit ⚠️ PR contains trivial changes to logic that should be properly reviewed. labels Mar 26, 2022
@kianenigma
Copy link
Contributor

hope I am not breaking anything for anyone, merging this manually to keep the master working.

@kianenigma kianenigma merged commit be00593 into paritytech:master Mar 26, 2022
@georgesdib georgesdib deleted the election-fallback branch March 26, 2022 14:43
@jakoblell jakoblell added D1-audited 👍 PR contains changes to critical logic that has been properly reviewed and externally audited. and removed D5-nicetohaveaudit ⚠️ PR contains trivial changes to logic that should be properly reviewed. labels Jun 8, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. B0-silent Changes should not be mentioned in any release notes C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. D1-audited 👍 PR contains changes to critical logic that has been properly reviewed and externally audited.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants