Skip to content

Do not cache slot committee aggregations for DVs #15110

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

Conversation

KaloyanTanev
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

Bug fix

What does this PR do? Why is it needed?

A distributed validator expects a signature from each node's validator client and aggregates once threshold is met. For aggregations Prysm VC caches aggregations in order not to needlessly duplicate aggregation requests to the beacon node. This is only in the cases If there was already an occurrence of aggregation from another validator the Prysm VC serves.

While this works perfectly in a traditional validator setup, it causes issues for DVs. In order the DV to be able to aggregate the signatures, Prysm VC should submit signature for the same validator. Currently this is left up to the chance which would be the first validator saved and the rest are discarded from the cache.

With this change, Prysm VC will submit all aggregations for DVs, instead of just the first one it encounters.

Which issues(s) does this PR fix?

N/A

Other notes for review

N/A

@KaloyanTanev KaloyanTanev requested a review from a team as a code owner March 31, 2025 16:43
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Mar 31, 2025

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@james-prysm
Copy link
Contributor

you'll need to add a changelog file for this to go through

@KaloyanTanev
Copy link
Contributor Author

Pardon, missed that one. Should be good now.

@rkapka rkapka enabled auto-merge April 2, 2025 14:06
@rkapka rkapka added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 2, 2025
Merged via the queue into OffchainLabs:develop with commit 785fefa Apr 2, 2025
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants