Skip to content

Conversation

@tbagrel1
Copy link
Contributor

Co-authored-by: nbacquey nbacquey@users.noreply.github.com

Description

Please include a meaningful description of the PR and link the relevant issues
this PR might resolve.

Also note that:

  • New code should be properly tested (even if it does not add new features).
  • The fix for a regression should include a test that reproduces said regression.

@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 changed the title Peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 [WIP] Experimental ObjectDiffusion v2 (just inbound side changes) for efficient vote retrieval Sep 29, 2025
@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch 3 times, most recently from 96b7016 to 8bd6007 Compare October 15, 2025 12:00
@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 changed the base branch from main-pr/object-diffusion to peras-staging October 15, 2025 12:03
@tbagrel1
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nbacquey nbacquey force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from d28fe49 to f794d6f Compare October 20, 2025 18:08
@nbacquey nbacquey force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from a459164 to 7fa719c Compare October 23, 2025 21:35
@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from 987f215 to 56c9c48 Compare October 27, 2025 09:21
@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from 94eb9ce to c6db8de Compare November 10, 2025 14:48
@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from c6db8de to 1a1c81d Compare November 10, 2025 15:21
Copy link
Contributor

@agustinmista agustinmista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some initial comments. I still need to take a look in depth at:

  • ObjectDiffusion/Inbound/V2/Decision.hs
  • ObjectDiffusion/Inbound/V2/Registry.hs
  • ObjectDiffusion/Inbound/V2/State.hs
  • Benchmarking commit

Copy link
Contributor

@agustinmista agustinmista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Another round of comments.

@tbagrel1
Copy link
Contributor Author

FTR, I'm a bit unsure about introducing a proper data type PeerDecision with two fields that are also new data types (4999b52).

In the end, instead of a single PeerDecision type, we now have four: PeerDecisionStatus > PeerDecision > {ReqIdsDecision, ReqObjectsDecision}. This seems a bit heavy, especially since these datatypes won't be enriched with new fields in the future.
We now have a much more verbose code structure just to make a specific state unrepresentable even though it wasn't really problematic/unsafe to begin with.

But I don't see a nicer alternative atm than what we already had before or what we have now... I initially used a plain tuple instead of the new PeerDecision type, but it isn't very satisfying either.

@tbagrel1 tbagrel1 force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from b95c960 to 95c23db Compare November 18, 2025 14:30
@tbagrel1
Copy link
Contributor Author

I pushed a few changes:

  • Fixed formatting on a couple of fairly long lines
  • Updated documentation in V2.md to reflect the new system of status for decisions
  • Squashed commits

@nbacquey nbacquey changed the title [WIP] Experimental ObjectDiffusion v2 (just inbound side changes) for efficient vote retrieval ObjectDiffusion v2 (just inbound side changes) for efficient vote retrieval Nov 19, 2025
@agustinmista agustinmista force-pushed the peras/experimental-object-diffusion-inbound-v2 branch from 95c23db to 7219242 Compare November 20, 2025 18:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Figure out non-trivial inbound logic for votes retrieval (ObjectDiffusion V2)

4 participants