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

Network scalability: 500 parachain validators and 100 cores (async backing enabled) #26

Open
21 of 26 tasks
sandreim opened this issue Jun 2, 2023 · 4 comments
Open
21 of 26 tasks

Comments

@sandreim
Copy link

sandreim commented Jun 2, 2023

Parachain consensus is restricted to a subset of the relay chain validators via themaxValidators configuration parameter. The plan is to remove the parameter, but until then we will gradually increase it's value as we improve the protocol and performance characteristics of the implementation. maxValidators is bumped to higher values only if key performance metrics, specifically parachain block times and finality lag do not degrade when more validators participate in parachain consensus.

The scalability project board is available here: https://github.com/orgs/paritytech/projects/63

After improving our tooling for profiling, gathering metrics and debugging we identified bottlenecks which we are currently addressing.

Experiments and potential improvements are tested on Versi before enabling them on value bearing chains like Kusama and Polkadot. After a battery of tests successfully ran on Versi we have already bumped the number of paravalidators from 200 to 250 on Kusama and we are currently monitoring the key metrics.

Q2 Plan

Q2 milestones:

  • Increase the number of parachain validators from 200 to 250 (supporting up to 70 parachains) on Kusama
  • Increase the number of parachain validators from 250 to 300 (supporting up to 70 parachains) on Kusama
  • Increase the number of parachain validators from 200 to 300 (supporting up 70 parachains) on Polkadot

We've learned from previous tests, that it is already possible for Versi to operate within parameters with 500 paravalidators and 70 parachains, but we've also identified that availability recovery is getting slower as the load on the network I/O increase. Supporting 100 parachains would create even more network load so this needs to be addressed for this milestone.

Q4 Plan

Q1 2024 milestone:

  • Increase the number of parachain validators from 300 to 500 (supporting up to 100 cores) on Kusama
  • Maybe start increase of the active set size on Polkadot.

2024

@sandreim sandreim moved this from Draft to Open in Parity Roadmap Jun 2, 2023
@paritytech-gh-issue-sync paritytech-gh-issue-sync bot moved this from Open to Draft in Parity Roadmap Jun 2, 2023
@sandreim sandreim moved this from Draft to Open in Parity Roadmap Jun 2, 2023
@Polkadot-Forum
Copy link

This issue has been mentioned on Polkadot Forum. There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-gradual-increase-of-active-validator-set-to-372-validators/3271/1

@sandreim sandreim changed the title Network scalability: 500 parachain validators and 100 parachains Network scalability: 500 parachain validators and 100 parachains (async backing enabled) Oct 20, 2023
@sandreim sandreim changed the title Network scalability: 500 parachain validators and 100 parachains (async backing enabled) Network scalability: 500 parachain validators and 100 cores (async backing enabled) Oct 26, 2023
@Polkadot-Forum
Copy link

This issue has been mentioned on Polkadot Forum. There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.polkadot.network/t/raising-awareness-new-network-validation-protocol-version-v3-coming/5639/1

@Polkadot-Forum
Copy link

This issue has been mentioned on Polkadot Forum. There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.polkadot.network/t/update-validator-set-size-increase-on-kusama/8218/1

@burdges
Copy link

burdges commented May 22, 2024

At the same time, we might observe a higher approval voting base lag, of up to 1.5 relay chain blocks

We discussed increasing the tranche size or no-show timeout, right?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Open
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants