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

Ignore Conway Genesis, except in SanchoNet #1674

Open
sgillespie opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Ignore Conway Genesis, except in SanchoNet #1674

sgillespie opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@sgillespie
Copy link
Contributor

The Conway genesis file frequently changes in backwards-incompatible ways, causing errors like this:

cardano-db-sync: Error SNErrConwayConfig: Failed reading Conway genesis file "/configs/conway-genesis.json": "There was an error parsing the genesis file: /configs/conway-genesis.json Error: Error in $.poolVotingThresholds: parsing Cardano.Ledger.Conway.Core.PoolVotingThresholds(PoolVotingThresholds) failed, key \"pvtMotionNoConfidence\" not found"

There's no need to load the Conway genesis, unless we're in a network that's in Conway (currently only Sancho). For this reason, we should create a config parameter in the db-sync config, say "EnableConway", defaulting to false. This way, we'll only attempt to load the Conway genesis if necessary, which should address this issue for users of Mainnet, Preview, and so on.

@rdlrt
Copy link

rdlrt commented Apr 11, 2024

Partly also discussed in #1665 , how will this help in future forks?

  1. The config param only applicable on Conway? When we go to next era (if it has new genesis), we will have similar issue
  2. Will be a stale leftover when we are on Conway across all networks?

Instead - Can this be generalized to something like EnableFutureGenesis ?

@sgillespie
Copy link
Contributor Author

How will this help in future forks?

I don't think it will help directly.

Will be a stale leftover when we are on Conway across all networks?

There will be, and we'll need to clean it up as soon as we can.

Instead - Can this be generalized to something like EnableFutureGenesis ?

This is not a bad idea. @kderme thoughts?

@kderme
Copy link
Contributor

kderme commented Apr 17, 2024

EnableFutureGenesis seems like a good idea long term.
I believe node config had something similar at some point, but not sure why it was dropped

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants