You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We have a trade-off between CI execeution time vs. Stability and the tuning parameter is the waiting-blocks after an extrinsic to ensure that our extrinsic is in the canonical chain.
Initially, it looked like 5 blocks of waiting is enough, but now we do get some failures due to tx reordering (i.e., next-phase accidentally before registering). Maybe it makes sense to increase the number to 7.
EDIT: Current CI fail rate seems to be around 25%
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As mentioned here, #234 (comment), I believe that we have a reasonable stability trade-off and we just hope that future substrate updates can make our CI more stable.
We have a trade-off between CI execeution time vs. Stability and the tuning parameter is the
waiting-blocks
after an extrinsic to ensure that our extrinsic is in the canonical chain.Initially, it looked like 5 blocks of waiting is enough, but now we do get some failures due to tx reordering (i.e., next-phase accidentally before registering). Maybe it makes sense to increase the number to 7.
EDIT: Current CI fail rate seems to be around 25%
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: