Conversation
|
sembr 🙏 |
|
Could you please apply sembr to this post @Daimakaimura |
|
@0xFugue could you please have a look too? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for this post :).
My comments are in-line.
The main issue, imo, is confusion around hardware problems seemingly being connected to Kurtosis,
but the only connection is Kurtosis not allowing a multi-machine setup.
You could set-up a red thread through the post by explaining that our simulations need high hardware requirements, and, because of this, Kurtosis only being able to run on a single machine does not allow us to scale simulations. That should also be part of the abstract.
|
@AlbertoSoutullo could please also check my comments, and check if you have some input 🙏 |
|
Thanks for the review @kaiserd |
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: kaiserd <1684595+kaiserd@users.noreply.github.com>
…into wakurtosis-retro
TL;DR
The Wakurtosis framework aimed to simulate and test the behaviour of the Waku protocol at large scales but faced a plethora of challenges that ultimately led us to pivot to a hybrid approach that relies on Shadow and Kubernetes for greater reliability, flexibility, and scaling. Here we will discuss some of the most important issues we faced and their potential solutions in a new hybrid framework.