-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
refactor new_peak_timelord #16881
refactor new_peak_timelord #16881
Conversation
This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request. |
consider overflows as well
# Conflicts: # tests/timelord/test_new_peak.py
Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly. |
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 8144610631Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
This PR has been flagged as stale due to no activity for over 60 days. It will not be automatically closed, but it has been given a stale-pr label and should be manually reviewed by the relevant parties. |
This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request. |
# Conflicts: # chia/_tests/timelord/test_new_peak.py
Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly. |
This PR has been flagged as stale due to no activity for over 60 days. It will not be automatically closed, but it has been given a stale-pr label and should be manually reviewed by the relevant parties. |
coverage exemption |
Last CI run is stale, going to close and re-open to run again. |
Please check the latest CI run. Some seemingly non-flakey failed jobs. As an aside, this PR was fairly clearly stale and imo should not have been approved without a new CI run. @almogdepaz @emlowe FYI |
|
Purpose:
improving the flow that handles a new peak
Current Behavior:
we would skip a new peak for the wrong condition in some edge cases
we would also handle peaks we should skip
New Behavior:
skip less heavy peaks even if we dont have unfinished blocks in the cache
Testing Notes:
added a test case for receiving a less heavy peak while we dont have unfinished blocks in the cache