-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
[Deliverable] Store v3-beta - Message Hashes #131
Comments
Store v3-beta message hashesI believe the cursor bug led to some delay in integrating in client side. What's our estimated completion date for the epics including some dogfooding Store v3 - store synchronisationI believe this is deployed, Is it enabled? I am guessing best to have "count store message" to properly dogfood and confirm working? |
From the point of view of go-waku and status-go nothing pending to be done except merging this PR status-im/status-go#5123, which has been open for a while and rebased from time to time against latest changes from master branch in both go-waku and status-go. @Ivansete-status and I dogfooded this on status.staging last week using this desktop PR status-im/status-desktop#15615 Once shards.test fleet is upgraded to v0.31 the status-go PR can be merged |
Delivered |
Project: https://github.com/orgs/waku-org/projects/16/views/1
Epics
Research Milestone
Output
Spec published here: https://github.com/waku-org/specs/blob/master/standards/core/store.md
Reference implementation: waku-org/nwaku#2431
and released in https://github.com/waku-org/nwaku/releases/tag/v0.28.0
Summary
An improved version of the Store protocol, marking a crucial increment towards a synchronisation protocol:
The proposed PR to simplify the Store protocol and use message
hashes as index/cursor, can be used as a starting point.
Store v3 - store synchronisation
semi-centralised (trusted) service nodes to a decentralised service capability in the network with inter-node synchronisation.
Building on Store v3-beta, this version of Store includes basic synchronisation between nodes.
This will probably include:
Note that this can either be
IMO (iii) should be pursued as the preferred option, as far as possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: