follow up on this subject of sign rate improvement on the network.
Follow-up on the subject of improving the signage rate on the network.
I’m continually monitoring overall performance and would like to share my findings here.
I make a selection on the graphs to show more clearly the elements I’d like to demonstrate.
On this screenshot I made 2 marks
- the FlashCat tombstone.
- the end of the vote for proposition 2 and start of incentives.
FlashCat tombstone
We can observe the same type of events as those explained above with the FlashCat tombstone
FlashCat was a well-ranked validator with an average miss rate like many other validators (~ 80 misses over the observation window).
FlashCat’s tombstone should have created a voting power differential allowing more validators to sign.
If we zoom in, we can see the cause-and-effect relationship more clearly
FlashCat is the red line replaced by Blockscape.
and at 23:00 the Nocturnal Labs validator begins to sign.
The reality is different, as FlashCat’s tombstone has the effect of giving more voting power (in %) to Figment with an almost perfect signature rate.
Block consensus is achieved more easily with sufficient voting power, and slower validators lose signing rate.
end of vote on proposal 2
We noticed an increase in network load shortly before the exchange incentives were introduced.
This shows an increase in chain activity (more transactions = more traffic).
This also has the effect of loading the network bandwidth of our servers a little more, which can lead to increased latency for signature broadcasts.
We can also see that some validators are having more difficulty.
This is also true for the best sign-rates.
