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

pcli: implement DetectDesync using ABCI queries #4966

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 16, 2024

Conversation

erwanor
Copy link
Member

@erwanor erwanor commented Dec 16, 2024

Describe your changes

This adds a pcli query chain detect-desync command which detect if a full node is affected by state desync (#4954).

Checklist before requesting a review

  • I have added guiding text to explain how a reviewer should test these changes.

  • If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

    Client change

@zbuc zbuc merged commit 626fbed into release/v0.80.x Dec 16, 2024
11 checks passed
@zbuc zbuc deleted the erwan/detect_desync branch December 16, 2024 21:36
conorsch added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2024
conorsch added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2024
## Describe your changes

The PR #4966 was
mistakenly targeted against `release/v0.80.x`, which branch has fallen
out of sync with main. If we want to make a Penumbra point release, PRs
should target `main`, and we'll tag directly on main.

Eventually we may want to revive `release/v0.80.x` and use it for
backports, but that time is not now. By reverting the out-f-order merge
from #4966, we leave the
door open to updating that branch in the future so it can be used to
manage backports.

## Issue ticket number and link

Just #4966 is relevant.

## Checklist before requesting a review

- [x] I have added guiding text to explain how a reviewer should test
these changes.

- [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the
"consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there
are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

> this is a housekeeping commit, intended to cleanup git history and
avoid confusion.
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.

2 participants