Conversation
Co-authored-by: Ethan Cemer <tylercemer@gmail.com>
|
@codex review this PR |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 423af7bf75
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| // NOTE: 24 is somewhat arbitrary and should be tuned in the future if | ||
| // necessary. See <https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/6080> | ||
| .with_per_connection_event_buffer_size(24) | ||
| .with_max_negotiating_inbound_streams(2048) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The swarm config now sets .with_max_negotiating_inbound_streams(2048), which reverts the earlier higher cap used in this fork to absorb large bursts of concurrent inbound substream opens (DHT, sync, notifications). On high-fan-in nodes (especially bootnodes), hitting this lower ceiling can drop negotiations and degrade peer connectivity/discovery under load. Please keep the higher limit (or make it configurable) to avoid a production reliability regression.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| @@ -250,7 +246,6 @@ impl DiscoveryConfig { | |||
| config.set_kbucket_inserts(BucketInserts::Manual); | |||
| config.disjoint_query_paths(kademlia_disjoint_query_paths); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
DiscoveryConfig::finish no longer applies an explicit max Kademlia packet size before enabling provider settings. This removes the fork-specific protection that allowed large FIND_NODE responses from bootnodes; falling back to the library default can cause oversized responses to be discarded, which hurts peer discovery in larger networks. Reintroducing the packet-size override (or equivalent) avoids that regression.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
2 participants
No description provided.