Repository navigation
the guard worked and the carry put the refused value back - #3435
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Verified the six audit fixes against the published blob rather than the
logs, and five landed exactly on the numbers the audit said they should:
success 100 at n=56, where it read 81.8182 at n=88
headline quicknode 91.07, chainstack 94.64, getblock 76.79, which is
the stated seven-cell method to the decimal
freshness 3.6 to 3.8 h, the oldest capability stamp, instead of being
pinned near one hour by the hourly eth_call stamps
windows dwellir 500 where it read 100, bound label applied
Solana the cross-tab view is gone
The sixth did not. chainstack still published minus 1.84 ms on the work
term, and the reason is the interesting part: its valuesMeta carries
`staleSince`. The `> 0` guard from #3420 was working, chainstack was
correctly absent from the fresh query, and the PANEL CARRY in the worker was
resurrecting the value the panel had refused.
From the merge, a query that filters deliberately and a query that failed
look identical. The carry exists for the second and cannot see the first.
This bench sets expected_freshness_seconds to 86400, which is right for a
capability probed every six hours and is also the carry ceiling, so an
impossible number would have sat first on a lower-is-better view for a day.
So the spec says which of the two it is. `carry: false` on a panel means a
missing value is a statement rather than a gap, and the worker leaves it
missing. Default behaviour is untouched: the carry is still the protection
against a Prometheus hiccup, which is the reason it exists.
Three tests, one per case, and a mutation that drops the flag check fails
the first. The other two pin that nothing changed for panels that do not
declare it.
261 specs valid, tsc clean, 873 tests pass.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
the guard worked and the carry put the refused value back
Verified the six audit fixes against the published blob rather than the
logs, and five landed exactly on the numbers the audit said they should:
The sixth did not. chainstack still published minus 1.84 ms on the work
term, and the reason is the interesting part: its valuesMeta carries
staleSince. The> 0guard from #3420 was working, chainstack wascorrectly absent from the fresh query, and the PANEL CARRY in the worker was
resurrecting the value the panel had refused.
From the merge, a query that filters deliberately and a query that failed
look identical. The carry exists for the second and cannot see the first.
This bench sets expected_freshness_seconds to 86400, which is right for a
capability probed every six hours and is also the carry ceiling, so an
impossible number would have sat first on a lower-is-better view for a day.
So the spec says which of the two it is.
carry: falseon a panel means amissing value is a statement rather than a gap, and the worker leaves it
missing. Default behaviour is untouched: the carry is still the protection
against a Prometheus hiccup, which is the reason it exists.
Three tests, one per case, and a mutation that drops the flag check fails
the first. The other two pin that nothing changed for panels that do not
declare it.
261 specs valid, tsc clean, 873 tests pass.