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

Optimization: Evaluate different strategies for picking agreement's vals. #198

Open
afck opened this issue Aug 8, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@afck
Copy link
Collaborator

afck commented Aug 8, 2018

The set of boolean values vals that is used at the end of each agreement epoch together with the coin value to determine what the next epoch's estimate will be and whether to terminate, now probably has several correct definitions (see amiller/HoneyBadgerBFT#59 (comment)):

  • Use whatever we sent in our Conf.
  • Use what we received in f + 1 of them.
  • If by the time we've received enough Confs, we have enough Aux messages to justify a particular vals, we can use that one.

What is the best strategy?

  • Prefer a single value?
  • Only prefer a single value if it's the coin value (i.e. terminate if possible), otherwise prefer the next coin round's value (if known)?

Some of these would possibly make a Conf round useful even in fixed-coin epochs. We should run benchmarks with different strategies and in different scenarios (with and without adversary, etc.). And we need to double-check that they are indeed sound!

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant