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

Incremental commits off-chain #1541

Draft
wants to merge 24 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

noonio
Copy link
Contributor

@noonio noonio commented Jul 31, 2024


  • CHANGELOG updated or not needed
  • Documentation updated or not needed
  • Haddocks updated or not needed
  • No new TODOs introduced or explained herafter

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 31, 2024

Transaction costs

Sizes and execution budgets for Hydra protocol transactions. Note that unlisted parameters are currently using arbitrary values and results are not fully deterministic and comparable to previous runs.

Metadata
Generated at 2024-09-05 09:46:30.094148092 UTC
Max. memory units 14000000
Max. CPU units 10000000000
Max. tx size (kB) 16384

Script summary

Name Hash Size (Bytes)
νInitial 2fac819a1f4f14e29639d1414220d2a18b6abd6b8e444d88d0dda8ff 3799
νCommit 2043a9f1a685bcf491413a5f139ee42e335157c8c6bc8d9e4018669d 1743
νHead bd9fad235c871fb7f837c767593018a84be3083ff80f9dab5f1c55f9 10194
μHead c8038945816586c4d38926ee63bba67821eb863794220ebbd0bf79ee* 4607
  • The minting policy hash is only usable for comparison. As the script is parameterized, the actual script is unique per head.

Init transaction costs

Parties Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 5188 5.61 2.21 0.44
2 5387 7.09 2.80 0.46
3 5590 8.59 3.40 0.49
5 5994 11.12 4.39 0.54
10 6999 18.06 7.14 0.66
56 16244 81.53 32.25 1.76

Commit transaction costs

This uses ada-only outputs for better comparability.

UTxO Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 557 10.52 4.15 0.29
2 746 13.86 5.65 0.34
3 933 17.33 7.20 0.38
5 1307 24.65 10.44 0.48
10 2249 45.22 19.36 0.75
20 4110 95.99 40.76 1.40

CollectCom transaction costs

Parties UTxO (bytes) Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 57 549 22.14 8.66 0.42
2 114 659 33.03 13.08 0.54
3 171 769 47.45 18.95 0.70
4 226 883 58.79 23.77 0.84
5 282 989 77.65 31.47 1.05
6 339 1100 89.82 36.84 1.19

Cost of Decrement Transaction

Parties Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 630 17.71 7.79 0.38
2 764 18.64 8.82 0.40
3 892 20.39 10.30 0.43
5 1351 25.68 13.78 0.52
10 2073 34.43 20.82 0.67
49 7745 95.14 72.85 1.78

Close transaction costs

Parties Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 638 21.02 9.41 0.42
2 830 22.82 11.12 0.45
3 985 24.33 12.57 0.48
5 1178 26.90 15.02 0.53
10 1889 34.35 22.26 0.67
50 7962 99.45 83.73 1.91

Contest transaction costs

Parties Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 673 27.14 11.67 0.48
2 822 28.94 13.20 0.52
3 1023 31.02 15.02 0.55
5 1313 34.99 18.37 0.62
10 2075 44.27 26.44 0.79
39 6284 98.71 73.01 1.75

Abort transaction costs

There is some variation due to the random mixture of initial and already committed outputs.

Parties Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
1 5082 17.47 7.60 0.57
2 5230 29.35 12.94 0.71
3 5325 38.98 17.11 0.82
4 5328 48.38 21.13 0.93
5 5489 67.03 29.51 1.15
6 5597 91.68 40.69 1.43

FanOut transaction costs

Involves spending head output and burning head tokens. Uses ada-only UTxO for better comparability.

Parties UTxO UTxO (bytes) Tx size % max Mem % max CPU Min fee ₳
5 0 0 5023 7.75 3.28 0.46
5 1 57 5056 8.69 3.91 0.47
5 5 284 5192 13.41 6.84 0.54
5 10 569 5361 18.87 10.31 0.61
5 20 1137 5700 30.38 17.51 0.77
5 30 1707 6041 41.90 24.72 0.93
5 40 2278 6382 53.03 31.76 1.09
5 50 2843 6717 64.56 38.97 1.25
5 81 4610 7772 99.62 61.05 1.74

End-to-end benchmark results

This page is intended to collect the latest end-to-end benchmark results produced by Hydra's continuous integration (CI) system from the latest master code.

Please note that these results are approximate as they are currently produced from limited cloud VMs and not controlled hardware. Rather than focusing on the absolute results, the emphasis should be on relative results, such as how the timings for a scenario evolve as the code changes.

Generated at 2024-09-05 09:20:48.344741988 UTC

Baseline Scenario

Number of nodes 1
Number of txs 3000
Avg. Confirmation Time (ms) 4.966539102
P99 8.192604079999994ms
P95 6.6394388ms
P50 4.775601ms
Number of Invalid txs 0

Three local nodes

Number of nodes 3
Number of txs 9000
Avg. Confirmation Time (ms) 23.986945374
P99 105.62266186000006ms
P95 33.37502679999999ms
P50 21.4751085ms
Number of Invalid txs 0

@noonio noonio linked an issue Aug 1, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@noonio noonio force-pushed the off-chain-incremental-commits branch from 235acca to 273fe91 Compare August 1, 2024 09:11
@ch1bo ch1bo force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 53b33e9 to 8d8d3a3 Compare August 15, 2024 17:09
@ch1bo
Copy link
Collaborator

ch1bo commented Aug 19, 2024

@noonio When we continue work here, we should take a step back again given the new overall design of #199 with details from #1571. The overall off-chain story has not changed much, but is basically separated in two parts:

@v0d1ch v0d1ch force-pushed the off-chain-incremental-commits branch 10 times, most recently from 7ea2e9f to e63ca63 Compare September 5, 2024 10:56
noonio and others added 14 commits September 9, 2024 09:18
- Using an empty head
- Getting some funds
- About to commit to the empty open head!
We are aiming for the simplified case where a user wants to spend all
provided UTxO without giving a blueprint to customize how to spend it.
- Submit the signed increment transaction
- Wait for the commit to be finalised
We generalize the Maybe Head into a CommitInfo data structure to
aggregate a read model of anything we need to distinguish the HTTP
server's behavior on POST /commit
Perhaps we could get away with just one handle and distinguish
using CommitInfo type in the end. Let's keep it verbose for now.

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>
@v0d1ch v0d1ch force-pushed the off-chain-incremental-commits branch from e8ac685 to bce740b Compare September 9, 2024 16:35
@v0d1ch v0d1ch force-pushed the off-chain-incremental-commits branch from bce740b to 7dc4c35 Compare September 9, 2024 16:44
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.

Implement off-chain user journey of incremental commits
3 participants