Skip to content

docs: add clarity to statesync #1958

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

docs: add clarity to statesync #1958

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jcstein
Copy link
Member

@jcstein jcstein commented Mar 28, 2025

Overview

Statesync section needs more clarity around what the user needs to set. From what was written (and from not reading closely enough), I thought I didn't need to set up RPCs.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Improved instructions and formatting for setting up state sync in consensus node configuration.
    • Added warning and tip blocks to emphasize the need for at least two RPC endpoints.
    • Updated example configuration with clearer guidance and placeholder endpoints.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 28, 2025

Walkthrough

The documentation for configuring state sync in the consensus node was revised to improve clarity and readability. Additional explanations and formatting were introduced, including warning and tip blocks to emphasize the requirement for multiple RPC endpoints. The example configuration for rpc_servers was updated with placeholders and clearer instructions. No changes were made to the underlying configuration parameters or any code.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
how-to-guides/consensus-node.md Enhanced documentation for state sync setup: added warnings, tips, improved formatting, and updated example configuration.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • rootulp

Poem

In docs where sync and states align,
New warnings and tips now brightly shine.
Placeholders guide you, clear and neat,
Two RPCs—your setup’s complete!
With every hop and every note,
The consensus node learns what we wrote.
🐇✨


Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

PR Preview Action v1.6.0

🚀 View preview at
https://celestiaorg.github.io/docs-preview/pr-1958/

Built to branch main at 2025-03-28 23:14 UTC.
Preview will be ready when the GitHub Pages deployment is complete.

2. Retrieve light blocks for verification
:::

In `$HOME/.celestia-app/config/config.toml`, set the RPC endpoints:
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we'd also need to leave a note here to set trusted height and hash, because it isn't clear to me. if you set height/hash higher than 1, for example at 5000, do you not sync anything before that height 5000?

@jcstein jcstein requested a review from adlerjohn May 2, 2025 13:58
@jcstein jcstein marked this pull request as ready for review May 2, 2025 13:58
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
how-to-guides/consensus-node.md (1)

228-234: Clarify placeholder values for state sync config
It may be unclear that trust_height and trust_hash must be replaced with actual values from a trusted RPC. Consider updating these lines with explicit placeholder comments to guide users.

 rpc_servers = "rpc.example1.com:port,rpc.example2.com:port"  # Replace with actual RPC endpoints
-trust_height = 0
-trust_hash = ""
+trust_height = <trusted_header_height>  # Replace with the trusted header height (e.g., 123456)
+trust_hash = "<trusted_block_hash>"     # Replace with the trusted block hash returned by /block
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5fdba14 and 282106d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • how-to-guides/consensus-node.md (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
how-to-guides/consensus-node.md (2)

222-226: Add warning for multi-endpoint requirement
The new warning block clearly emphasizes the need for at least two RPC endpoints, preventing misconfiguration during state sync.


246-248: Good use of tip to reinforce best practices
This tip block nicely reminds users that more RPC endpoints improve fraud detection.

@adlerjohn adlerjohn requested review from rootulp, cmwaters and evan-forbes and removed request for adlerjohn May 2, 2025 20:49
To their respective fields. At least two different rpc endpoints should be provided.
The more, the greater the chance of detecting any fraudulent behavior.
::: tip
The more RPC endpoints you provide, the greater the chance of detecting any fraudulent behavior.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this true? if there are more than 2 endpoints provided, do we check them all? What happens if we do and say 1/10 endpoints is down?

also, if we are making the assumption that we are not eclipsed attacked, presumably we would either construct or someone would gossip some double signing, no?

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.

2 participants