Optimisations relating to get_expected_withdrawals#9314
Open
michaelsproul wants to merge 5 commits into
Open
Conversation
michaelsproul
added
the
optimization
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue Addressed
Tweaking/optimising
get_expected_withdrawalson the pre-Gloas path, after the removal of some optimisations in:ForkchoiceUpdatebased on updatedPayloadStatus#9102Proposed Changes
prepare_beacon_proposercalls fromregister_validator. These calls were: heavily duplicated, happening too early (at the start of the slot before the block arrived), expensive on epoch boundaries (forcing an early epoch transition), and unnecessary. They are completely safe to remove because the scheduled proposer preparation routine exists.get_expected_withdrawals/prepare_beacon_proposerto find more unexpected callers.Additional Info
K-37