igneum-network/igneum
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Releases Activity

Consequences ledger: C2 closed on the miner-on curve; C22 the 30 GB CPU prover against the macOS switch; sweep 5 notes; D2 the two drafts and the 24 GB marker

Browse source 
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
igneum-labs 2026-10-05 21:09:39 +00:00
parent 9fd666f3ff
commit 2bc198b89d
2 changed files with 5 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

5
docs/plans/consequences-2026-10-05.md
View file

@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Rows already handled before this ledger opened, for the shape: 15.6 GB mine-and-
| # | Number | Source | Tier affected | Consequence | Action | Owner | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Fee switch H = 210,000, reached about 19:50Z on 6 October (0.965 blocks/s) | `docs/plans/fee-switch-devnet.md` sections 3 and 7; `vendor/igneum-node-0310/igneum/exec/src/rpc.rs` 849 (no `daaScore`, no `feesV1ActivationDaa` in `igneum_exportSegments`); the app's exporter call without `--fees-v1-activation-daa` (`app/igneum-app/src/prover.rs` 516 to 519) | every prover on the devnet (PC 2, the Mac, any 0.3.10 machine) | From the first chain block at or above H the 0.3.10 node cuts 30,000-pgas shards and meters with the v1 table, but the app's exporter sees a dump without the switch and cuts at 7.5 M with the prototype table: the host refuses the fixture (wrong `S_p`) or the node vetoes the statement. Proving on the devnet goes dark at H and nothing is paid until every prover runs a node whose export carries the switch (the proving-v1 fork does, `vendor/igneum-node-pv1` rpc.rs 961 and 982). `pc2-chain.ps1` fixtures from the live node fail the same way after H | Either 0.3.11 (proving-v1 fork) on every prover before H, or the switch republished at a later H before 19:50Z tomorrow (a digest flip, every node). Recommendation in `consequences-decisions.md` D1 | proving v1 acd4f36bc2c07a4e2, shipper ae892a8b0f78fe31c, coordinator ada8afb62d752b1e2 | in work (proving agent: fork eb32c645 on 21d4c73c carries daaScore and feesV1ActivationDaa, the exporter needs no flag; 0.3.11 on every prover before 16:00Z on 6 October or H moves to tip + 86,400; the line is in the proving plan, the rollout plan and release-0.3.10.md) |
| C2 | 16,751 MiB GPU peak during the chain of 8 with the miner resident (`chain-pc2-pv1c`) | bench-log "proving v1", step 2 chain row | 16 GB cards (RTX 5080, 5060 Ti 16 GB, 4060 Ti 16 GB) | The plan's "a 16 GB card sits 0.4 GB under tonight's peak" is the empty-shard row (15,590 MiB). The chained aggregation adds 1.2 GB and lands at 16.4 GB, over a 16 GB card. So a 16 GB card cannot mine and aggregate on this build; it can at most mine and prove shards, with 0.4 GB spare and no full shard measured | The 16 GB chained-aggregation row goes into the sweep; the aggregator step in `prover.rs aggregate_once` gates on card memory (24 GB with the miner running, else pause the miner on that card for the aggregation); the Proving tile says which role the card runs | proving v1 | in work in part (proving agent: full and empty shard peaks with the miner running measuring now, job memminer-pc2-pv1; aggregate_once gets a card-memory gate tonight, no aggregation from a mining card under 20 GB, the tile names the role; pausing the miner for an aggregation refused for tonight, 0.3.12) |
| C2 | 16,751 MiB GPU peak during the chain of 8 with the miner resident (`chain-pc2-pv1c`) | bench-log "proving v1", step 2 chain row | 16 GB cards (RTX 5080, 5060 Ti 16 GB, 4060 Ti 16 GB) | The plan's "a 16 GB card sits 0.4 GB under tonight's peak" is the empty-shard row (15,590 MiB). The chained aggregation adds 1.2 GB and lands at 16.4 GB, over a 16 GB card. So a 16 GB card cannot mine and aggregate on this build; it can at most mine and prove shards, with 0.4 GB spare and no full shard measured | The 16 GB chained-aggregation row goes into the sweep; the aggregator step in `prover.rs aggregate_once` gates on card memory (24 GB with the miner running, else pause the miner on that card for the aggregation); the Proving tile says which role the card runs | proving v1 | closed as measured (proving agent, spcurve-miner-pc2-pv1 219517f: the adopted shard beside the miner 22,210 MiB and 13.2 s, so a 24 GB card has 2.3 GB spare from the fee switch, the number approximate for the card itself because it is the 5090's allocation pattern; the prototype shard 30.1 GB, the 32 GB card alone; aggregation_card gates on the same memory rule, 23,552 MB either role). Open: the first real 24 GB card measurement, and the public line says "24 GB" from a 32 GB card's pattern (D2 wording) |
| C3 | 13,816 MiB GPU peak, prover alone, empty shards (`prover-cost-pc2-pv1`) | bench-log "proving v1", step 1 | 12 GB cards (RTX 3060 12 GB, 4070, 5070), the default-on rule (`provedefault.rs` `MIN_VRAM_MB` 11,776) | On the only measurement the prover by itself exceeds a 12 GB card by 1.5 GB, so the 12 GB default gate switches proving on for cards that cannot run it on this build unless the SP1 knobs bring the peak down. The litepaper's "12 GB or more proves full shards" (`site/litepaper.html` 560) and evidence row 16 rest on the sweep | 0.3.11 does not ship the default-on until the sweep has a row under 11.5 GB for a full v1 shard; if none, the gate moves to 24 GB and the public claim is qualified (D2) | proving v1 (sweep in work); public claim: decision | closed as measured (proving agent: the sweep moves no floor, 13.9 GB for an empty shard, 28.3 GB for a full prototype shard; the default is 20 GB mining / 16 GB prove-only; the 12 GB sentence is false on this build and goes to the project lead as D2 with the curve); the v1-shard row is C15 |
| C4 | Host RAM 25,550 MB used of 63,132 on PC 2 with the prover on; the WSL2 VM working set 7,915 MB | bench-log "proving v1", step 1 host RAM row | Windows home miners with 16 GB RAM (the common gaming PC); Macs with 16 GB switching the CPU prover on | The prover default has no RAM floor. On Windows the WSL2 VM alone holds 7.9 GB beside the app, the node and the game-class desktop; a 16 GB machine with proving on by default swaps or kills the node. The app's own RSS (engine, node, verifier) is not separated in the measurement, so no requirement can be stated yet | The sweep job records the app's and the node's working sets beside the VM's; `provedefault` reads total RAM and stays off under 32 GB on Windows until measured; the Proving tile and the miner page state the RAM requirement | proving v1; miner UI adbf58b058186a18b (the tile line) | closed in code (proving v1 c2544be: MIN_RAM_MB_WINDOWS 31,000 in provedefault.rs, the tile line names the 7.9 GB VM on a 63 GB PC; unknown RAM is not a gate; the miner UI help line next cut) |
| C5 | The app quit for the 0.3.10 update at 20:01:09Z and aborted the chain job at block 3 ("aborted (the app is quitting)"); `prover.rs` kills the child on quit | bench-log "proving v1" chain run 1; `app/igneum-app/src/prover.rs` 266 to 272 | every prover on every update; with proving v1 the aggregator | Tonight's `update-now` to every app aborts whichever shard each prover has in flight (up to 37 s of work each, no payout, re-assigned to nobody until the window passes). Under proving v1 a restart mid-segment loses the aggregator's chain state: the segment goes unproven after T (600 DAA), the aggregator share of 8 blocks is forfeited to the escrow, and the next record must be fresh-chain. With one aggregator on the devnet every app update costs 10 minutes of unproven segments | The update's safe moment waits for the prover's current proof (as it does for the node); the aggregator persists the last segment proof and resumes the chain after a restart; the Updates section says "waits for the proof in flight". For 0.3.10 tonight the aborted shards are an accepted cost, recorded | proving v1; shipper (tonight's rollout note); miner UI (Updates wording) | refused for tonight by the proving agent (persisting the segment proof and holding the update for a proof in flight are 0.3.12; the cost is in the plan as the rule working as written); the shipper carries the aborted-shard count in release-0.3.10.md section 8; the 20:01:09Z abort was NOT 0.3.10 (shipper: nothing published), see C16 |
@ -36,3 +36,6 @@ Rows already handled before this ledger opened, for the shape: 15.6 GB mine-and-
| C21 | OTA K2: apps embed `OTA_PUBLIC_KEYS = [K1, K2]` and honour a signed `revoked_keys` list; the rig installer verifies the manifest with ONE key (`OTA_PUBLIC_KEY_HEX`, install-rig.sh 168, igneum-update.sh 2) and knows no revocation; the HiveOS package verifies nothing (no manifest, the override reaches it only by republish) | ota-k2 c722579; packaging/linux; packaging/hive | rigs (both packages), the seeds (if they take the manifest) | The day K1 is lost or revoked and the manifest is signed with K2, every rig on the installer refuses the manifest, stops taking overrides, and is isolated at the next height switch; a leaked K1 keeps signing for rigs, because they carry no revocation list. HiveOS rigs get neither keys nor revocation: a republished package is their only path, and nothing checks who published it | The rig installer carries both public keys and the `revoked_keys` rule in the same form as the app (keys.md section 4, step 3), installed and read from the manifest; the HiveOS README states that the package is unsigned and names the sha256 the Flight Sheet URL should be checked against; keys.md lists the rig and HiveOS paths in its table of what trusts K1 | OTA key af2bb75a5436324d0 (keys.md, the shared verifier form); rig installer a3e7b2b03222f5cff | closed for the rig and the docs (rig installer 88f31d9: OTA_PUBLIC_KEYS [K1, K2 slot] embedded, manifest_check mirrors the app's manifest::check with the revoked_keys record at /var/lib/igneum/updates/revoked.json, tested on three throwaway keys; OTA agent 00fcbb5: keys.md table of every path that trusts K1, the HiveOS README unsigned-archive note); open: the wallet (wallet-v1) still trusts K1 alone, listed in keys.md for its owner; merge note: packaging/hive/README.md is edited on both ota-k2 and hive-words |
Sweep 3 (20:46 Mac clock) notes, no new row: the 9070 XT dropped off PC 1's bus at about 20:40 UTC (the second eGPU fault of the day); the coordinator stated the consequences (G1 on the gfx1036 stand-in, the 9070 XT v3 hash-rate and power rows owed, every earlier 9070 XT row stands, the AMD sweep queue item blocked, nobody woken) in its 21:05 and 21:10 entries and the rollout plan 7b. The epoch-length plan (ca2-epoch 4300608) carries its own per-tier table (section 7), including the node tier (one core 100% busy on the VDF at the 600-s floor) and the chain (24% of blocks in difficulty settle at the floor). The proving agent's 440fd59 rewrote the litepaper's two proving-gate sentences and evidence rows 15 and 16 on its branch (D2: the project lead approves the draft); the litepaper's card-lifetime sentence is untouched (D3, D4).
| C22 | The SP1 CPU prover peaks at 29.5 to 30.5 GB RSS whatever the shard size and costs 282 s a shard (PC 1, `cpu-prove-pc1-small2`); no zkVM proves on AMD; the analysis concludes "no CPU tier" | `docs/analysis/amd-proving.md` sections 2, 3, 4a (amd-prove f1d7a7d, merged into ca2-coord) | Macs with 16 or 24 GB (the Settings switch turns the CPU prover on); AMD-only Windows and Linux machines (Settings can switch it on); every tier's expectation of the 20% share | provedefault.rs has a RAM gate for Windows (31,000 MB) and none for macOS or Linux, so a 16 GB Mac that flips the switch runs a 30 GB prover into swap and takes the node down with it (the Mac went down at 1% battery on 4 October; this is the same class of outage from memory). The analysis says the tile must say "about five minutes, paid only when no card proves first" but not that the switch is refused under 32 GB. The public tiers: AMD and Apple miners never see the 20% share on this build (now on the site, 1c8439f) | The CPU-prover switch is refused with the reason on every OS under 32 GB of RAM (the Windows constant generalised: macOS reads hw.memsize, Linux /proc/meminfo), and the tile line carries the 5-minute and 30 GB figures | proving v1 acd4f36bc2c07a4e2 | sent |
Sweep 5 (21:08 Mac clock) notes: the coordinator applied the public proving line on ca2-coord (1c8439f: index, litepaper, miner page: "an NVIDIA card with 24 GB or more proves; AMD and Apple cards mine; a prover for them lands when a zkVM ships one") and the proving agent rewrote the litepaper's two gate sentences on proving-v1 (440fd59): two drafts of overlapping public sentences on two unpushed branches, both for the project lead (D2, D8); the integrator takes one. The measure-lock convoy (a0c3d13: a dead holder, two waiters, cargo tests re-acquiring build slots) is stated by the coordinator with a next-cut task. The S_p CPU shard job was dropped on the 312-s small-shard number (stated). GitHub Actions outage: the 0.3.10 installer builds on PC 1 (stated, 21:01).

2
docs/plans/consequences-decisions.md
View file

@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Sibling of `ledger-decisions.md`. Each is a consequence of a measured number tha
| # | Row | What needs deciding | Recommendation | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | C1 | The fee switch lands at H = 210,000 about 19:50Z on 6 October, and the 0.3.10 node's export does not carry the switch, so every app prover's shards are refused or vetoed from H. Move H, or race 0.3.11 onto every prover first | If 0.3.11 (with the proving-v1 fork, whose export carries `daaScore` and `feesV1ActivationDaa`) is not on every prover by 16:00Z on 6 October, republish the override with H = tip + 86,400 rounded to the next thousand, re-read the digest on a scratch node, every node in one sweep (the fee-switch plan's own rule for a later H). The coordinator holds the devnet delegation; this note is so the morning does not find proving dark | A dark proving pool on the devnet costs nothing on chain (the escrow keeps it) but every coverage, latency and fleet number measured after H is void |
| D2 | C3 | The litepaper says "12 GB or more proves full shards"; the only measurement puts the prover alone at 13.8 GB on a 32 GB card | The sweep and the S_p curve are in (proving agent, 5 October late): no knob moves the floor; 12 GB proves nothing on SP1 6.8.1, 16 GB proves only empty shards alone, 24 GB proves the adopted 30,000-pgas shard (20.4 GB alone, about 22 GB beside the miner), 32 GB proves everything. Change the sentence to "24 GB or more proves; 32 GB proves and mines on one card" and evidence row 16 to tested-by-the-team on those rows; the 12 GB figure returns only if a smaller GPU server or a smaller shard measures under 12 GB. The proving agent has drafted the two replacement sentences on its branch (app 440fd59, litepaper and evidence rows 15 and 16); nothing is pushed, so the project lead approves or rewrites the draft rather than starting from the measurement | A public number that the first 3060 owner disproves is the FUD the ledger exists to prevent |
| D2 | C3 | The litepaper says "12 GB or more proves full shards"; the only measurement puts the prover alone at 13.8 GB on a 32 GB card | The sweep and the S_p curve are in (proving agent, 5 October late): no knob moves the floor; 12 GB proves nothing on SP1 6.8.1, 16 GB proves only empty shards alone, 24 GB proves the adopted 30,000-pgas shard (20.4 GB alone, about 22 GB beside the miner), 32 GB proves everything. Change the sentence to "24 GB or more proves; 32 GB proves and mines on one card" and evidence row 16 to tested-by-the-team on those rows; the 12 GB figure returns only if a smaller GPU server or a smaller shard measures under 12 GB. The proving agent has drafted the two replacement sentences on its branch (app 440fd59, litepaper and evidence rows 15 and 16); nothing is pushed, so the project lead approves or rewrites the draft rather than starting from the measurement. Two drafts exist: the proving agent's litepaper sentences (proving-v1 440fd59) and the coordinator's site, litepaper and miner-page line (ca2-coord 1c8439f); the integrator keeps one. One marker is owed on either: the 24 GB figure is the 5090's allocation pattern on a 32 GB card (22.2 GB beside the miner), not a measurement on a 24 GB card, and evidence rule 3 wants that said until a 4090 or a 5080-class 24 GB card runs it | A public number that the first 3060 owner disproves is the FUD the ledger exists to prevent |
| D3 | C8, C13 | The homepage says "Any 4 GB card" and the litepaper says a 4 GB card mines for about four years and an 8 GB card for more than a decade; the tile says "4B hard cap" while the rule mints about 3.96 billion | Replace with the lifetime table's numbers once the sub-agent lands it: "4 GB cards mine at launch; 8 GB for about six years; 12 GB for about fourteen; the dataset grows half a gigabyte a year" and "cap 4 billion, about 3.96 billion ever minted" | The schedule is public and the arithmetic is one line; a reader will do it |
| D4 | C9, C8 | Index mapping at gate 1, now with the lifetime table (`docs/analysis/card-lifetime-2026-10-05.md`): (a) multiply-shift, continuous growth: 4 GB cards out at 1.0 to 1.5 years, 8 GB at 6.3 to 7.5, 12 GB at 12 to 13.5, Apple 8 GB at 2.6 to 3.4; (b) power-of-two steps at years 4, 12, 28, 60: 4 GB to year 4, 8 GB to year 12, 12 GB to year 28 (the cache freed after the build, decided by the coordinator at 22:50), each tier ending on a step day | (b), with the step calendar published on the miners page from day one (the years 4, 12, 28 and 60 named beside the tiers), and the 1 GiB vectors kept. Revised from (a) at 23:0x: the table shows (b) is the only mapping under which the litepaper's "4 GB about four years, 8 GB more than a decade" holds, and a step day known twelve years ahead is a schedule, not an event; the coordinator recommends the same | Under (a) both public sentences are wrong today by 2.5 to 5 years; under (b) they hold and the cliffs are dated |
| D5 | C10 | The site's "under 2x" chip claim: the scratch layer leaves the on-die-cache recompute chip at 2.4x at every share; the mixer multiplier x2 brings it to 1.2x at twice the CPU verify cost (about 0.9 ms per warp, half the pool members per core) | Carry the mixer x2 into class v3 on the devnet tonight (the coordinator's gates apply, the verify time per warp measured) and keep the claim; if the coordinator judges it outside the delegation, qualify the claim in level 3 until the project lead says | The claim is the project's first public sentence on chips; it is either true by a measured lever or it is marked |