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

Incorrect Guarantee Statistics #61

Closed
emielsebastiaan opened this issue Feb 14, 2025 · 3 comments
Closed

Incorrect Guarantee Statistics #61

emielsebastiaan opened this issue Feb 14, 2025 · 3 comments

Comments

@emielsebastiaan
Copy link

Incorrect Guarantee Statistics

We found an inconsistency between our [{PyJAMaz}] implementation and the JAM-Duna implementation in the test data for the Assurances mode.
Reference:

Analysis

The block has a work-report which is verifiably guaranteed by 3 validators. Hence 3 validators should get their guarantee statistic increased (and not only 1 as per jam-duna data).
We suspect an incorrect implementation of GP-0.6.2-eq:13.4 in JAM Duna, in which statistics are stored based on the author index of the block and not based on the Reporters-set.

Difference

JAM Duna Data

[
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 0,
    "guarantees": 0,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 0
  },
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 0,
    "guarantees": 0,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 0
  },
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 0,
    "guarantees": 0,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 0
  },
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 0,
    "guarantees": 0,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 0
  },
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 3,
    "guarantees": 0,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 6
  },
  {
    "assurances": 0,
    "blocks": 1,
    "guarantees": 1,
    "pre_images": 0,
    "pre_images_size": 0,
    "tickets": 3
  }
]

[{PyJAMaz}] Data

[
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 0, 
    "guarantees": 0, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 0
  }, 
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 0, 
    "guarantees": 1, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 0
  }, 
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 0, 
    "guarantees": 1, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 0
  }, 
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 0, 
    "guarantees": 1, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 0
  }, 
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 3, 
    "guarantees": 0, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 6
  }, 
  {
    "assurances": 0, 
    "blocks": 1, 
    "guarantees": 0, 
    "pre_images": 0, 
    "pre_images_size": 0, 
    "tickets": 3
  }
]
@sourabhniyogi
Copy link
Contributor

You are correct, will fix!

@sourabhniyogi
Copy link
Contributor

We now have 3 validators incrementing due to their guaranteeing, not 1 due to including 1 guarantee with 3 signatures

@sourabhniyogi
Copy link
Contributor

Addressed in 0.6.2.2

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants