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

State independent verification (Neo 3) #801

Closed
igormcoelho opened this issue Jun 7, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

State independent verification (Neo 3) #801

igormcoelho opened this issue Jun 7, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@igormcoelho
Copy link
Contributor

I was thinking, and perhaps having state-related things on Verification would harm TPS anyway. I mean, if we have Storage.Get here, it means that nodes should have complete state in order to verify transactions, and this behavior should change, correct?
Do you think it's too damaging, removing everything state-related from verification now, example, storage access, past notifications, past block access (except for last block), and focus only on things you could immediately access and compute? This is an even stricter view of my other proposal on neo-vm, but I think it's interesting and perhaps necessary for a massive performance.
Clients could still perform timelocks, multisig (with finite loops) and classic verification stuff.

I think this helps PR discussion: #791

And vm issue: neo-project/neo-vm#151

@igormcoelho
Copy link
Contributor Author

@igormcoelho igormcoelho changed the title State independent verification State independent verification (Neo 3) Jun 7, 2019
@igormcoelho igormcoelho added this to the NEO 3.0 milestone Jun 7, 2019
@igormcoelho
Copy link
Contributor Author

Verification cannot be fully state independent, because of NEP-5 transfers. But we can make it partially independent, only depending on few state operations, that don't require precise state updates.

@erikzhang erikzhang removed this from the NEO 3.0 milestone Jun 13, 2019
Thacryba pushed a commit to simplitech/neo that referenced this issue Feb 17, 2020
update offline sync package page link
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants