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

changes for unified[wip] #6758

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: unstable
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pedromiguelmiranda
Copy link
Contributor

some initial changes for unified project.

@@ -1869,7 +1869,7 @@ proc onSlotStart(node: BeaconNode, wallTime: BeaconTime,

proc onSecond(node: BeaconNode, time: Moment) =
# Nim GC metrics (for the main thread)
updateThreadMetrics()
# updateThreadMetrics()
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Metrics collection not generated, and this code is commented. possible solutions may required a significant rewrite (using some strategy simliar to an aggregator pattern)

@@ -2364,7 +2364,7 @@ proc doRunBeaconNode(config: var BeaconNodeConf, rng: ref HmacDrbgContext) {.rai

# Nim GC metrics (for the main thread) will be collected in onSecond(), but
# we disable piggy-backing on other metrics here.
setSystemMetricsAutomaticUpdate(false)
# setSystemMetricsAutomaticUpdate(false)
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same

@@ -2548,7 +2548,7 @@ proc handleStartUpCmd(config: var BeaconNodeConf) {.raises: [CatchableError].} =

{.pop.} # TODO moduletests exceptions

programMain:
when isMainModule:
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pedromiguelmiranda pedromiguelmiranda Dec 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This might be an outdated strategy.however it's present in other "main" modules as well.
What is the impact of using the "when is" approach vs this one?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant