fix(IDONTWANT)!: Do not IDONTWANT your sender #609
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
vyzo
approved these changes
Apr 30, 2025
Merged
MarcoPolo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 29, 2025
This release contains a couple fixes and the new Batch Publishing feature. - #607 Batch Publishing. Useful if you are publishing a group of related messages at once - #612 Send IDONTWANT before initial publish. Useful when many nodes may publish the same message at once. - #609 Avoid sending an extra "IDONTWANT" to the peer that just sent you a message. - #615 10x faster rpc splitting.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We were sending IDONTWANT to the sender of the received message. This is pointless, as the sender should not repeat a message it already sent. The sender could also have tracked that it had sent this peer the message (we don't do this currently, and it's probably not necessary).
@ppopth