No they work in conjunction actually. BRB for dynamic membership and CRDT’s for data. Byzantine Eventual (another approach) also is improved with CRDT type data (particularly commutative operations). CRDT for user data types is where we get the win.
BRB as we currently have it uses a generation clock as @neo noted, so there is in a section a “clock” i.e. a monotonically increasing number. It won’t have a usable resolution for “time” but could prove useful for some other things, we have yet to see though.
Can someone please explain how work denomination of node with existing data?
What is time period for denomination and what happen when he reach minimum age ?
I saw there some other changes this week, so is there final vision how it should work ?
Yes, we are forcing nodes to do some work, right now it’s only a resource proof (POW type thing) but will be replaced with random testing chunks exist in the correct places. So nodes trying to join need to prove they have tested 1000 random chunks and then they are allowed in when the network needs them.
It simplifies things a bit as Infants had no work and were a pain to handle, I mean it cost the network work to even monitor them. So now we ask nodes to do valuable work that takes a while to prove they are worthy and they are not just transient folk running a node to see what it looks like.
This is answer I wanted
And second questions is, as there is no tolerance for disconnected nodes, but it is within seconds or several minutes before they get some punishment ?
Feels like we need to rename them?
Infant/Adult/Elder made sense in that situation, coming into the world as an adult seems odd.
I am sure Jim will be on it.
Okay I just looked at the roadmap. It says that the only thing missing for a Flemming network is vaults from home. But when you go to the vaults from home section it says everything is completed. This is confusing. What actually needs to be done to give us a Flemming network? And shouldn’t we be further along the way to Maxwell by now? Beyond just “Concept” phase? I mean shouldn’t at least some of the planning steps be laid out at least?
When I read these updates I think “Okay that’s cool, sounds awesome, but where does it fit into the long road to getting us to launch?” I don’t mind having a long road and going slow but I like to know how everything fits together.
This has me Confused. Just a matter of semantics, no? Are you really planning to change the terminology or just the implementation under the hood? Terminology-wise the infant → adult → elder analogy is a very simple and easy way to get a mental picture of the section dynamics. It would be a shame to throw the baby out with the bathwater here. The only apparent change is that infants need to prove they know how to walk before they are given keys to the family car. Is the following not a good description?
infants : nodes working to join a section by testing N random chunks, or having tested greater than N random chunks and are waiting for graduation to adulthood.
adults: nodes that have met all the requirements of an infant and are accepted by the network to perform valuable work.
elders: nodes that have gained sufficient age while performing valuable work as an adult. Having proven themselves trustworthy they are now responsible for decision making processes and have signing authority.
Yes it makes sense to think of a new node joining the network as an Infant . Actually it’s quite nice as we have 2 node join types, those that are relocated from other sections (can be Adult or Elder) and brand new nodes (infants). The Infant is the one that has to do some work to Join whereas all others have already proven themselves.
I think we should use this in the code actually as we do confuse that a little. Nice one @jlpell
For me this is totally new. Previously both adults and elders were storing blobs (circa July).
I don’t remember this change has been discussed. I don’t like it because once a node has reached the elder status it will have less work to do, will need less storage space and will leave easily from its annuities.
As elders give orders and adults execute them, a clear naming would be:
elders => masters
adults => slaves
(or more politically correct: managers and associates)
We allowed Elders to store chunk in early tests, but they should not.
Think like this, Adults are like disk drives in a computer. Store stuff there and let it be. In a section they are almost append only immutable data stores.
Elders have massive amounts of work to do and possibly too much. They take care (atm) of all mutable data, transfers (safecoin), client connections, Adult penalties and all network agreements/consensus.
So in Safe the “masters” really need to work hard to earn their corn They get paid more but need to work more and that seems fair.
No Infants any more. Adults store blobs and Elders everything else plus make decisions. Is this what you are asking?
that would be epic. Maybe until test net just in case
They get paid more but need to work more and that seems fair.