Cosmos-sdk: Tracking issue for tendermint v0.34

[marbar3778]

This issue is meant as a tracking issue for the upcoming tendermint release and things that need to be completed in the sdk:

• [x] Evidence is capped to an absolute number. max_num was added to consensus evidence params
• [x] #6164 ABCI update for block pruning. ResponseCommit.retain_height which gives the applicaiton control over block pruning.
• [x] Application should change tendermint consensus params: cosmos/cosmos-sdk#6197
• [x] All key types will be migrated to []byte instead of an array.
• [x] Tendermint removed libs.KV, this is used in the sdk, it will need to be brought back in the sdk
• [x] Tendermint will allow runtime indexing.
• [x] #7018
• [x] #7020 (PR #7208)
• [x] #7166
• [x] #7190 (PR #7251)
• [ ] update to final release version 0.34.0
• [x] register new evidence type with amino (https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/pull/7251#discussion_r484518230)

Here is the Tendermint v0.34 tracking issue: https://github.com/tendermint/tendermint/issues/5288

For Admin Use

• [x] Not duplicate issue
• [ ] Appropriate labels applied
• [ ] Appropriate contributors tagged
• [ ] Contributor assigned/self-assigned

[cmwaters]

This might be relevant here. The new evidence that can be detected and committed to a block is:

• DuplicateVoteEvidence
• PhantomValidatorEvidence
• LunaticValidatorEvidence
• AmnesiaEvidence

It is also possible to commit PotentialAmnesiaEvidence but the consensus algorithm alone won't do it.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[marbar3778]

* DuplicateVoteEvidence

* LunaticValidatorEvidence

* AmnesiaEvidence

phantomevidence was removed

[marbar3778]

tm-db 0.6.x is returning more errors now instead of panicking. A walkthrough of the code base is recommended to check errors.

[clevinson]

@marbar3778 is it required for 0.40 that we update x/evidence to hande the new evidence types above?

[marbar3778]

@marbar3778 is it required for 0.40 that we update x/evidence to hande the new evidence types above?

It is recommended but if not then IF something happens the sdk wont handle it. @cwgoes if the evidence updates don't land in 0.40 would it be a problem?

[cwgoes]

@marbar3778 is it required for 0.40 that we update x/evidence to hande the new evidence types above?

It is recommended but if not then IF something happens the sdk wont handle it. @cwgoes if the evidence updates don't land in 0.40 would it be a problem?

The SDK definitely needs to handle all evidence types Tendermint might send over ABCI and slash validators accordingly, yes.

[robert-zaremba]

@marbar3778 , there are still few open issue.
Is there anything we should help / watch on coming from the Tendermint side?

[marbar3778]

@marbar3778 , there are still few open issue.
Is there anything we should help / watch on coming from the Tendermint side?

Everything from the Tendermint side is almost complete, outstanding is evidence.

The only thing I would say is outstanding on the SDK side is block pruning support.

[robert-zaremba]

Thanks, are there going to be any changes which will require updates on this work (SDK side)?

[marbar3778]

Thanks, are there going to be any changes which will require updates on this work (SDK side)?

I don't see any changes needed after your PR is merged, but take that with a grain of salt. lol 😄

[marbar3778]

This issue can be closed, not sure the benefit of keeping it open for only updating to the latest release of tendermint?