Skip to content

Conversation

@michaelsproul
Copy link
Member

Issue Addressed

Closes:

Proposed Changes

Sign attestations prior to checking them against the slashing protection DB. This allows us to avoid the sequential DB checks which are observed in traces here:

Additional Info

This PR builds on:

This is a rework of Eitan's PR:

I started by trying to resolve merge conflicts, but there were so many breakages I ended up redoing it. I also left out some of the other changes (like the AttestationDataService) as we are probably going to introduce a new version of that in the course of implementing the head monitor + consensus service, see:

@michaelsproul michaelsproul added val-client Relates to the validator client binary optimization Something to make Lighthouse run more efficiently. labels Dec 2, 2025
@eserilev eserilev self-requested a review December 2, 2025 16:17
@michaelsproul michaelsproul added the v8.1.0 Post-Fulu release label Jan 11, 2026
@michaelsproul michaelsproul mentioned this pull request Jan 20, 2026
6 tasks
@michaelsproul
Copy link
Member Author

Self-review complete. This is ready for review and hopefully merge 🤞

@jimmygchen jimmygchen added waiting-on-author The reviewer has suggested changes and awaits thier implementation. and removed ready-for-review The code is ready for review labels Jan 22, 2026
@michaelsproul michaelsproul added ready-for-review The code is ready for review and removed waiting-on-author The reviewer has suggested changes and awaits thier implementation. labels Jan 27, 2026
Copy link
Member

@jimmygchen jimmygchen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice, I've done another round of review and this looks solid! Thanks

@jimmygchen jimmygchen added ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge. and removed ready-for-review The code is ready for review labels Jan 27, 2026
@mergify mergify bot added the queued label Jan 27, 2026
@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Merge Queue Status

🚫 The pull request has left the queue (rule: default) at 7099fda

This pull request spent 24 minutes 47 seconds in the queue, including 23 minutes 6 seconds running CI.
The checks were run on draft #8701.

Required conditions to merge
  • check-success=local-testnet-success
  • check-success=test-suite-success

Reason

The merge conditions cannot be satisfied due to failing checks

Hint

You may have to fix your CI before adding the pull request to the queue again.
If you update this pull request, to fix the CI, it will automatically be requeued once the queue conditions match again.
If you think this was a flaky issue instead, you can requeue the pull request, without updating it, by posting a @mergifyio requeue comment.

mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2026
@mergify mergify bot added dequeued and removed queued labels Jan 27, 2026
@michaelsproul
Copy link
Member Author

@mergify requeue

@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Jan 27, 2026

requeue

✅ The queue state of this pull request has been cleaned. It can be re-embarked automatically

@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Merge Queue Status

✅ The pull request has been merged at 7099fda

This pull request spent 1 hour 58 minutes 46 seconds in the queue, including 1 hour 57 minutes 26 seconds running CI.
The checks were run on draft #8702.

Required conditions to merge
  • check-success=local-testnet-success
  • check-success=test-suite-success

@mergify mergify bot added queued and removed dequeued labels Jan 27, 2026
mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2026
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 0f57fc9 into sigp:unstable Jan 27, 2026
36 checks passed
@mergify mergify bot removed the queued label Jan 27, 2026
macladson pushed a commit to macladson/lighthouse that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2026
…tleneck (sigp#8516)

Closes:

- sigp#1914


  Sign attestations prior to checking them against the slashing protection DB. This allows us to avoid the sequential DB checks which are observed in traces here:

- sigp#8508 (comment)


Co-Authored-By: Jimmy Chen <[email protected]>

Co-Authored-By: Michael Sproul <[email protected]>

Co-Authored-By: Michael Sproul <[email protected]>
@jimmygchen
Copy link
Member

Seeing improved attestation task times but worse aggregate task times - i think you noticed and mentioned this last time, just noting it down in case we want to investigate furhter next week @michaelsproul

image

@michaelsproul
Copy link
Member Author

hmm I don't remember seeing this previously, might be worth a look

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

optimization Something to make Lighthouse run more efficiently. ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge. v8.1.0 Post-Fulu release val-client Relates to the validator client binary

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants