The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1907

v0d1ch · 2025-03-20T12:09:21Z

This is another chunk of work related to building and posting txs responsible for creating Hydra script outputs using Blockfrost
Unfortunately I had to use a fork of the official library since I could not find a workaround for overlapping json instance https://github.com/blockfrost/blockfrost-haskell/blob/1a5360a51a1b61a14ffac4827f30c1ed525dedf3/blockfrost-api/src/Blockfrost/Types/Cardano/Pools.hs#L170
Work here contains initial efforts by @ffakenz Refactor PublishOptions to support Blockfrost options + building and submitting relevant txs and code to connect publishing of scripts in this way.
One could test it like so:

➜ nix run .#hydra-node -- publish-scripts \
    --blockfrost-project-path "/home/v0d1ch/code/hydra/blockfrost.txt" \
    --blockfrost-cardano-signing-key hydra-cluster/config/credentials/alice.sk
47d353a235d79df09cd9988de61d1996f91d1c8353a50a50b0e70d243f8c6db5,0e357d764666224e39af69ecaf1525980df57595340ac8895fdd023349b62522,68560aa902b388b9a226ad6ed0c33fbe2749353d36336ecce27623600ca43964

CHANGELOG updated or not needed
Documentation updated or not needed
Haddocks updated or not needed
No new TODOs introduced or explained herafter

github-actions · 2025-03-20T15:28:01Z

Transaction cost differences

Script summary

Name	Size (Bytes)
νInitial	-
νCommit	-
νHead	-
μHead	-
νDeposit	-

`Init` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
40	-	-	-	-

`Commit` transaction costs

UTxO	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
54	-	-	-	-

`CollectCom` transaction costs

Parties	UTxO (bytes)	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-	-
4	-	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-	-
6	-	-	-	-	-
7	-	-	-	-	-
8	-	-	-	-	-

Cost of Increment Transaction

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	$${\color{green}-0.39}$$	$${\color{green}-0.09}$$	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	$${\color{green}-0.39}$$	$${\color{green}-0.09}$$	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
37	-	-	-	-

Cost of Decrement Transaction

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
40	-	-	-	-

`Close` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
34	-	-	-	-

`Contest` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	-	-	-	-
2	-	-	-	-
3	-	-	-	-
5	-	-	-	-
10	-	-	-	-
27	-	-	-	-

`FanOut` transaction costs

UTxO, Parties	UTxO (bytes)	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
(0, 10)	-	-	-	-	-
(1, 10)	-	-	-	-	-
(5, 10)	-	-	-	-	-
(10, 10)	-	-	-	-	-
(20, 10)	-	-	-	-	-
(37, 10)	-	-	-	-	-

github-actions · 2025-03-20T15:28:31Z

Transaction costs

Sizes and execution budgets for Hydra protocol transactions. Note that unlisted parameters are currently using arbitrary values and results are not fully deterministic and comparable to previous runs.

Metadata
Generated at	2025-04-02 14:57:46.162391975 UTC
Max. memory units	14000000
Max. CPU units	10000000000
Max. tx size (kB)	16384

Script summary

Name	Hash	Size (Bytes)
νInitial	c8a101a5c8ac4816b0dceb59ce31fc2258e387de828f02961d2f2045	2652
νCommit	61458bc2f297fff3cc5df6ac7ab57cefd87763b0b7bd722146a1035c	685
νHead	0e35115a2c7c13c68ecd8d74e4987c04d4539e337643be20bb3274bd	14756
μHead	57166715eadb8d3135964325c016eea546c21e1c0aae974ca67df9a5*	5541
νDeposit	ae01dade3a9c346d5c93ae3ce339412b90a0b8f83f94ec6baa24e30c	1102

The minting policy hash is only usable for comparison. As the script is parameterized, the actual script is unique per head.

`Init` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	6095	10.80	3.35	0.53
2	6298	13.56	4.22	0.57
3	6495	15.71	4.88	0.60
5	6897	20.19	6.25	0.66
10	7904	31.18	9.61	0.82
40	13936	98.88	30.39	1.78

`Commit` transaction costs

This uses ada-only outputs for better comparability.

UTxO	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	561	2.44	1.16	0.20
2	738	3.38	1.73	0.22
3	923	4.36	2.33	0.24
5	1277	6.41	3.60	0.28
10	2175	12.13	7.25	0.40
54	10077	98.61	68.52	1.88

`CollectCom` transaction costs

Parties	UTxO (bytes)	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	57	525	26.44	7.58	0.44
2	114	636	33.99	9.79	0.52
3	169	747	41.97	12.05	0.61
4	227	858	52.15	14.92	0.72
5	281	969	65.79	18.55	0.86
6	340	1081	68.92	19.64	0.90
7	395	1192	75.74	21.79	0.97
8	450	1303	92.24	26.14	1.14
9	508	1414	98.12	27.89	1.21

Cost of Increment Transaction

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	1785	25.50	8.33	0.49
2	1921	27.03	9.47	0.52
3	2064	28.65	10.64	0.55
5	2280	30.55	12.52	0.59
10	3246	44.92	20.70	0.81
38	7319	97.56	56.13	1.67

Cost of Decrement Transaction

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	615	23.99	7.61	0.43
2	827	26.90	9.08	0.47
3	989	29.14	10.36	0.50
5	1237	31.87	12.43	0.55
10	2087	45.55	19.54	0.75
38	6224	97.98	52.67	1.60

`Close` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	688	29.19	9.22	0.48
2	841	30.98	10.44	0.51
3	1030	33.56	11.99	0.55
5	1261	37.18	14.42	0.61
10	2158	51.78	22.52	0.83
32	5427	95.00	51.36	1.53

`Contest` transaction costs

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	670	35.95	11.00	0.55
2	847	38.85	12.63	0.59
3	900	39.66	13.34	0.61
5	1275	45.22	16.55	0.69
10	1948	56.90	23.44	0.86
26	4426	95.13	46.25	1.45

`Abort` transaction costs

There is some variation due to the random mixture of initial and already committed outputs.

Parties	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
1	5990	28.20	9.30	0.71
2	6046	36.53	12.00	0.80
3	6286	47.74	15.78	0.93
4	6369	53.77	17.74	0.99
5	6567	67.83	22.41	1.15
6	6590	75.13	24.68	1.23
7	6828	84.71	28.00	1.34
8	6868	92.93	30.67	1.42

`FanOut` transaction costs

Involves spending head output and burning head tokens. Uses ada-only UTXO for better comparability.

Parties	UTxO	UTxO (bytes)	Tx size	% max Mem	% max CPU	Min fee ₳
10	0	0	6091	19.66	6.46	0.62
10	1	57	6126	21.79	7.29	0.65
10	5	284	6261	28.93	10.13	0.73
10	10	568	6429	42.80	15.34	0.89
10	30	1707	7111	84.49	31.56	1.37
10	37	2107	7350	98.48	37.03	1.54

End-to-end benchmark results

This page is intended to collect the latest end-to-end benchmark results produced by Hydra's continuous integration (CI) system from the latest master code.

Please note that these results are approximate as they are currently produced from limited cloud VMs and not controlled hardware. Rather than focusing on the absolute results, the emphasis should be on relative results, such as how the timings for a scenario evolve as the code changes.

Generated at 2025-04-02 15:00:05.226857177 UTC

Baseline Scenario

Number of nodes	1
Number of txs	300
Avg. Confirmation Time (ms)	4.396488833
P99	6.91553711ms
P95	5.2504213ms
P50	4.25732ms
Number of Invalid txs	0

Memory data

Time	Used	Free
2025-04-02 14:58:50.326026642 UTC	885M	3775M
2025-04-02 14:58:55.325900528 UTC	1008M	3622M
2025-04-02 14:59:00.325856902 UTC	1009M	3621M
2025-04-02 14:59:05.325835873 UTC	1009M	3621M
2025-04-02 14:59:10.325841569 UTC	1010M	3620M
2025-04-02 14:59:15.325835829 UTC	1012M	3617M

Three local nodes

Number of nodes	3
Number of txs	900
Avg. Confirmation Time (ms)	27.666624184
P99	40.72365471999998ms
P95	36.18284755ms
P50	26.853201499999997ms
Number of Invalid txs	0

Memory data

Time	Used	Free
2025-04-02 14:59:28.303909465 UTC	894M	3744M
2025-04-02 14:59:33.304475453 UTC	1192M	3441M
2025-04-02 14:59:38.306091961 UTC	1240M	3327M
2025-04-02 14:59:43.304299113 UTC	1247M	3280M
2025-04-02 14:59:48.304083686 UTC	1252M	3274M
2025-04-02 14:59:53.304154712 UTC	1253M	3272M
2025-04-02 14:59:58.30431092 UTC	1261M	3264M
2025-04-02 15:00:03.304191541 UTC	1263M	3262M

ch1bo · 2025-03-25T12:14:02Z

Unfortunately I had to use a fork of the official library since I could not find a workaround for overlapping json instance https://github.com/blockfrost/blockfrost-haskell/blob/1a5360a51a1b61a14ffac4827f30c1ed525dedf3/blockfrost-api/src/Blockfrost/Types/Cardano/Pools.hs#L170

@v0d1ch What issue concretely did you encounter with the instance overlap? i.e. which of our instances would overlap with this one?

v0d1ch · 2025-03-25T12:16:43Z

@ch1bo json instance for Message type https://github.com/cardano-scaling/hydra/blob/master/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs#L48 specifically incrementUTxO field

ch1bo · 2025-03-25T12:42:52Z

@ch1bo json instance for Message type https://github.com/cardano-scaling/hydra/blob/master/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs#L48 specifically incrementUTxO field

Okay. This works for me:

diff --git a/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs b/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs
index b7ea84b91d..14c4441a70 100644
--- a/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs
+++ b/hydra-node/src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs
@@ -45,8 +45,8 @@ data Message tx
 
 deriving stock instance IsTx tx => Eq (Message tx)
 deriving stock instance IsTx tx => Show (Message tx)
-deriving anyclass instance IsTx tx => ToJSON (Message tx)
-deriving anyclass instance IsTx tx => FromJSON (Message tx)
+deriving anyclass instance {-# OVERLAPPABLE #-} IsTx tx => ToJSON (Message tx)
+deriving anyclass instance {-# OVERLAPPABLE #-} IsTx tx => FromJSON (Message tx)
 
 instance ArbitraryIsTx tx => Arbitrary (Message tx) where
   arbitrary = genericArbitrary

We should add an explanation though and ideally we would have more fine-grained constraints in the future as that would make it more clear that Maybe (UTxOType tx) is the issue here (it depends on how UTxoType tx is instantiated and as soon as one concrete Maybe Type is in scope this can overlap).

v0d1ch · 2025-03-25T13:27:44Z

Hmm... I already tried using OVERLAPPABLE but it didn't do the trick. I'll report back when I get to it.

v0d1ch · 2025-03-25T14:27:36Z

Yup, this is what I used to get too:

src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs:48:1: error: [GHC-43085]
    • Overlapping instances for ToJSON (Maybe (UTxOType tx))
        arising from a use of ‘aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.ToJSON.$dmtoJSON’
      Matching instance:
        instance ToJSON a => ToJSON (Maybe a)
          -- Defined in ‘aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.ToJSON’
        ...plus one instance involving out-of-scope types
          Potentially matching instance:
            instance [overlap ok] ToJSON
                                    (Maybe
                                       blockfrost-api-0.12.1.0:Blockfrost.Types.Cardano.Pools.PoolMetadata)
      (The choice depends on the instantiation of ‘tx’
       and the result of evaluating ‘UTxOType’
       To pick the first instance above, use IncoherentInstances
       when compiling the other instance declarations)
    • In the expression:
        aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.ToJSON.$dmtoJSON @(Message tx)
      In an equation for ‘toJSON’:
          toJSON
            = aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.ToJSON.$dmtoJSON @(Message tx)
      When typechecking the code for ‘toJSON’
        in a derived instance for ‘ToJSON (Message tx)’:
        To see the code I am typechecking, use -ddump-deriv
      In the instance declaration for ‘ToJSON (Message tx)’
   |
48 | deriving anyclass instance {-# OVERLAPPABLE #-} IsTx tx => ToJSON (Message tx)
   | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

src/Hydra/Network/Message.hs:49:1: error: [GHC-43085]
    • Overlapping instances for FromJSON (Maybe (UTxOType tx))
        arising from a use of ‘aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.FromJSON.$dmparseJSON’
      Matching instance:
        instance FromJSON a => FromJSON (Maybe a)
          -- Defined in ‘aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.FromJSON’
        ...plus one instance involving out-of-scope types
          Potentially matching instance:
            instance [overlap ok] FromJSON
                                    (Maybe
                                       blockfrost-api-0.12.1.0:Blockfrost.Types.Cardano.Pools.PoolMetadata)
      (The choice depends on the instantiation of ‘tx’
       and the result of evaluating ‘UTxOType’
       To pick the first instance above, use IncoherentInstances
       when compiling the other instance declarations)
    • In the expression:
        aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.FromJSON.$dmparseJSON @(Message tx)
      In an equation for ‘parseJSON’:
          parseJSON
            = aeson-2.2.3.0:Data.Aeson.Types.FromJSON.$dmparseJSON
                @(Message tx)
      When typechecking the code for ‘parseJSON’
        in a derived instance for ‘FromJSON (Message tx)’:
        To see the code I am typechecking, use -ddump-deriv
      In the instance declaration for ‘FromJSON (Message tx)’
   |
49 | deriving anyclass instance {-# OVERLAPPABLE #-} IsTx tx => FromJSON (Message tx)

cabal.project

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Options.hs

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Chain/Blockfrost/Client.hs

noonio

Looks really great.

I think perhaps only thing missing would be an example in hte docs of using this?

ch1bo · 2025-04-01T13:40:43Z

Created an upstream PR to get rid of the overlapping instances: blockfrost/blockfrost-haskell#71

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

We submit a tx and wait to see it returned from blockfrost. Then we get the tx output utxo and use that for the next tx. Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

There is an json instance for (Maybe PoolMetadata) which overlaps with our instances for Maybe types. This is a ugly workaround but I couldn't find anything else that works. Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Remove extra diff and pragma Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Introduce a function to re-map from blockfrost to ledger GenesisParameters Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

- small refactor Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

ch1bo

I do approve of these changes, but please consider my suggestions

cabal.project

ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:43:58Z

docs/docs/configuration.md

+```shell
+hydra-node publish-scripts \
+  --blockfrost /path/to/node.socket \
+  --cardano-signing-key cardano.sk


ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:44:45Z

hydra-cluster/test/Test/DirectChainSpec.hs

@@ -436,6 +436,7 @@ spec = around (showLogsOnFailure "DirectChainSpec") $ do
            )
            ""
        let hydraScriptsTxId = fromString <$> splitWhen (== ',') (filter (/= '\n') hydraScriptsTxIdStr)
+        threadDelay 1


Should: not be needed

ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:47:04Z

hydra-node/hydra-node.cabal

    , serialise
+    , sop-extras


Should: not need these extra packages

I'm surprised that these are needed - where?

ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:51:25Z

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Chain/ScriptRegistry.hs

+  txs <- publishHydraScripts' networkId socketPath sk
+  pure $ getTxId . getTxBody <$> txs
+
+publishHydraScripts' ::


Should: not need so many variants of similar functions

This one is definitely odd.. do we need it only because of awaitTransaction? If yes, creating an awaitTransactionId instead is preferable.

ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:53:22Z

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Chain/ScriptRegistry.hs

+        maybe mempty UTxO.singleton $
+          UTxO.find (\o -> selectLovelace (txOutValue o) > totalDeposit) utxo
+   in case buildTransactionWithPParams' pparams systemStart eraHistory stakePools changeAddress utxoToSpend [] output of
+        Left e -> error $ show e


Should: not use error

Make the overall function an Either and throw an exception in IO if you want, but not create partial functions according to our style guide

ch1bo · 2025-04-02T15:56:40Z

hydra-node/test/Hydra/OptionsSpec.hs

+                    , hydraScriptsTxId = defaultDirectChainConfig.hydraScriptsTxId
+                    , startChainFrom = defaultDirectChainConfig.startChainFrom
+                    , contestationPeriod = defaultDirectChainConfig.contestationPeriod
+                    , depositDeadline = defaultDirectChainConfig.depositDeadline


Should: avoid the repetition of all changes above here

why are these even changed?

v0d1ch self-assigned this Mar 20, 2025

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from 61346f9 to 2df6034 Compare March 20, 2025 12:10

v0d1ch linked an issue Mar 20, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request

Add Hydra/Chain/Blockfrost/Client.hs to handle transaction building using the Blockfrost API. #1908

Open

v0d1ch requested a review from a team March 20, 2025 15:55

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from 64da63c to e13dbf2 Compare March 24, 2025 07:43

v0d1ch mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2025

Publish scripts via blockfrost api #1881

Closed

4 tasks

v0d1ch changed the title ~~Handle transaction building using blockfrost api~~ The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost Mar 25, 2025

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from 6e05445 to 6d70b75 Compare March 25, 2025 08:51

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch 2 times, most recently from 95a1748 to d59b491 Compare March 25, 2025 14:41

v0d1ch linked an issue Mar 25, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request

The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1668

Open

2 tasks

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch 4 times, most recently from f5b5a55 to 01f471d Compare April 1, 2025 08:43

ch1bo requested changes Apr 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

cabal.project Show resolved Hide resolved

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Options.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Options.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

hydra-node/src/Hydra/Chain/Blockfrost/Client.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from 4ae3950 to 7551449 Compare April 1, 2025 11:00

noonio requested changes Apr 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch 2 times, most recently from e5bfa0f to 86bbb99 Compare April 1, 2025 16:48

v0d1ch requested review from ch1bo and noonio April 1, 2025 16:49

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch 4 times, most recently from eea10e7 to f113fcd Compare April 2, 2025 07:52

noonio force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from f113fcd to f72ed9e Compare April 2, 2025 11:01

ffakenz and others added 18 commits April 2, 2025 16:53

refactor PublishOptions to depend on ChainConfig

12117ce

add blockfrost client dependency

960e041

sketch of publish Hydra scripts

0560951

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Map ProtocolParams to ledger PParams

b84bc3b

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Await for tx from blockfrost

941d563

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Use custom type instead of a huge tuple

62c8489

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Chain txs using blockfrost data

e479be1

We submit a tx and wait to see it returned from blockfrost. Then we get the tx output utxo and use that for the next tx. Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Use a fork of blockfrost-haskell as a workaround

61336a8

There is an json instance for (Maybe PoolMetadata) which overlaps with our instances for Maybe types. This is a ugly workaround but I couldn't find anything else that works. Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Add weeder module ignore

65de986

Remove extra diff and pragma Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Add Blockfrost as a chain option

e69f258

Introduce a function to re-map from blockfrost to ledger GenesisParameters Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Chain txs with less blockfrost interaction

66b7dfb

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Remove weeder entry by using blockfrost module in Run

ec595fd

- small refactor Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

PR review: Keep only needed blockfrost publishing options

84ece42

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

PR review: Reuse logic to assemble script publish tx

bd00eeb

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Add blockfrost publishing to the docs

ec7ba4c

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Delay querying for scripts a bit

8b12692

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

Non-redundant PublishOptions

a200d4f

Re-used publish scripts tx building and awaiting

348303b

Signed-off-by: Sasha Bogicevic <[email protected]>

v0d1ch force-pushed the handle-transaction-building-using-blockfrost-api branch from ca750b0 to 348303b Compare April 2, 2025 14:53

ch1bo approved these changes Apr 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1907

The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1907

v0d1ch commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

noonio left a comment

ch1bo commented Apr 1, 2025

ch1bo left a comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1907

Are you sure you want to change the base?

The hydra node can publish hydra scripts via blockfrost using --blockfrost #1907

Conversation

v0d1ch commented Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading

Transaction cost differences

Script summary

Init transaction costs

Commit transaction costs

CollectCom transaction costs

Cost of Increment Transaction

Cost of Decrement Transaction

Close transaction costs

Contest transaction costs

FanOut transaction costs

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading

Transaction costs

Script summary

Init transaction costs

Commit transaction costs

CollectCom transaction costs

Cost of Increment Transaction

Cost of Decrement Transaction

Close transaction costs

Contest transaction costs

Abort transaction costs

FanOut transaction costs

End-to-end benchmark results

Baseline Scenario

Memory data

Three local nodes

Memory data

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 • edited Loading

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 • edited Loading

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

v0d1ch commented Mar 25, 2025

noonio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo commented Apr 1, 2025

ch1bo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ch1bo Apr 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

v0d1ch commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

`Init` transaction costs

`Commit` transaction costs

`CollectCom` transaction costs

`Close` transaction costs

`Contest` transaction costs

`FanOut` transaction costs

github-actions bot commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

`Init` transaction costs

`Commit` transaction costs

`CollectCom` transaction costs

`Close` transaction costs

`Contest` transaction costs

`Abort` transaction costs

`FanOut` transaction costs

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ch1bo commented Mar 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading