-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 237
chore: revert per-quorum reservation payments prs #1759
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
Merged
Merged
Conversation
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
This reverts commit 1091f46.
This reverts commit a5acd93.
This reverts commit a9c0868.
This reverts commit 1003b98.
This reverts commit 26c612f.
This reverts commit 7ac688d.
This reverts commit ed89588.
This reverts commit 319a865.
This reverts commit d795dfa.
This reverts commit afbef90.
This reverts commit 36a3d33.
This reverts commit c229748.
This reverts commit 4d1994e.
This reverts commit 61e46ac.
This reverts commit a309139.
…)" This reverts commit 58acdfd.
This reverts commit bcbf9f5.
This reverts commit ce4d2f5.
The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Buf Proto / buf (pull_request).
|
This error was likely removed by mistake during a revert conflict fix from one of the previous set of reverted PRs.
litt3
requested changes
Jul 14, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As discussed offline, the following PR should be reapplied:
We deployed to preprod environment at 20MB/s and didn't see the errors anymore. |
litt3
approved these changes
Jul 16, 2025
dmanc
approved these changes
Jul 16, 2025
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.
Got Claude to go through the reverts one by one and fix the merge conflicts (still not 100% why there were conflicts). The diff with 0.9.2 is available in https://www.notion.so/eigen-labs/pr-1759-diffs-with-v0-9-2-22d13c11c3e080fea264d56a1820427e, and it consists of only a few good additions coming from PRs other than the ones reverted in here. Then fixed a few things by hand.
Why are these changes needed?
Trying to start Payments afresh. See https://linear.app/eigenlabs/project/payments-recalibration-27b0d6698b61/issues and https://www.notion.so/eigen-labs/Release-2-1-0-22413c11c3e0809ea585eafa44a3fc23?source=copy_link#22413c11c3e080728739e7e2ce126c62 for more info.
This is needed to make our 2.1.0 release, since the per-quorum reservation PRs that are being reverted here contain some racey logic on the disperser which causes tx errors. We want to rethink the architecture and properly serialize payments processing. We will likely un-revert the protobuf PR and just fix the implementation, but for now we consider cleaner to just revert everything.
Protobuf breaking changes
All the protobuf breaking changes are from per-quorum payments methods that we are removing. This is fine because those only landed on preprod which is internal to us, so these changes won't break any clients.