►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
We
will
just
be
our
CLI
version
in
preparation
for
for
further
releases,
as
we
add
a
little
bit
more
functionality
such
as
Daedalus,
so
today
we're
just
gonna,
go
I,
think
and
speak
to
everyone
about
the
status
and
what
they've,
what
they've
found
over
the
last
week.
One
of
the
major
pieces
of
functionality
that
we've
been
looking
at
is
is
obviously
fast
is
fast,
sync
and
regular,
sync,
so
yeah
Adam.
Do
you
want
to
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
your
test
experience?
A
B
So,
as
I
said,
I
was
testing
the
alpha
sync
and
tweaking
it
as
well.
So
we
found
few
configuration
options
that
had
to
be
changed
to
make
it
run
faster,
and
besides
that,
we
also
found
issue
that,
in
some
cases
when
our
client
is
failing
because
of
discovery
provides
us
with
not
good
quality
peers,
then
it
is
possible
that
we
will
not
download
mp3
in
a
time
frame
that
it
is
a
variable
from
other
clients
so
inverse.
B
B
We
were
not
able
to
connect
to
any
ears
and
we
were
just
stuck
and
the
whole
process
took
like
four
three
three
days
yeah
and
we
and
to
test
that
if
the
issue
is
really
with
our
peer
connections,
we
started
another
fast
sync,
only
with
bootstrap
nodes
to
stick
with
what
we
believe
are
a
good
peers,
and
this
thing
is
currently
on.
It
was
started
earlier
today,
it's
on
700,000
blocks
and
on
40
million
14
million
MPT
state.
No
state
notes.
B
Maybe
it's
just
that
we
started
from
different
portion
of
the
network
in
the
discovery
because,
as
you
said,
those
are
two
different
running
notes.
Right.
A
Right
and
these
sent,
the
the
reports
of
these
runs,
are
out
on
the
wiki
they're
there
in
a
fairly
raw
format,
but
they're
out
there
sitting
on
the
wiki
just
actually
well,
it
occurs
to
me
one
of
the
differences.
I
guess
two
things
probably
to
talk
about
one
of
the
first
one
is
the
configuration,
so
our
configuration
is
done
through
a
configuration
file.
A
A
So
that
will
be
a
change
that
I
guess
we'll
have
to
we'll
have
in
by
the
end
of
by
the
end
of
this
week,
so
that
the
the
client
will
be
appropriately
named
rather
than
it's
currently
in
the
in
the
alpha
release.
That's
out
on
the
that
seven
get
up
at
the
moment
it's
called
it's
called
et
Cie
client.
So
that's
one
thing
and
then
I
cannot
remember.
If
we
talked
about
this
last
week,
we
wish
but
the
discovery
nodes
we
had.
A
A
Yeah
so
well,
discovery,
as
we
said,
is,
is
is
getting
through
a
lot
of
peers.
A
lot
of
them
are
not
and
I'm
just
not
relevant,
unfortunately,
to
what
we're
trying
to
do
so
so
yeah
bit
of
a
question
mark
there
over
whether
we
would
recommend
discovery
or
or
or
just
leave
it
off,
I
mean.
Obviously
the
good
news
is
that
it's
configurable
in
the
configuration
file-
okay,
Adam,
so
you
that's
that's
several
runs
of
fast
sync.
You've
done
to
completion,
yeah
I've
actually
done
a
couple
myself.
A
All
right,
great
I
know
that
there's
a
peor
of
yours
to
do
that
MPT
and
to
put
the
NPT
nodes
up
front-
that's
going
through
today,
so
we'll
have
that
in
in
we'll
be
able
to
to
regress.
Well,
we've
already
done
quite
a
bit
of
testing.
We
were
able
to
do
another
regression
test
towards
the
end
of
the
week.
Okay,
okay,
I.
B
A
B
C
Yes,
I've
been
running
our
client
locally,
with
Discovery
on
and
running
the
fast
sink,
with
few
breaks
in
total
total
time
of
sinking
was
around
16
17
hours.
I
think
that
was
pretty
good
and
the
database
for
that
client
is
actually
served
on
our
server
yeah
and
there
is
one
thing
about
that
sink.
We
discovered
that
we're
missing
about
fifty
fifty
thousand
blocks
database
and
we
already
found
one
issue
that
has
been
fixed.
That
is
a
potential
issue
that
may
have
caused
that
and
now
I
started
fasting
again
and
it's
irani
right.
A
Yeah
so
I
I,
also
the
first
sink
I
actually
tested
that
fast
sink
with
the
with
the
bootstrap
database
that
you
provided
and
that
ran
from
from
where
the
bootstrap
picked
up.
Sorry,
where
the
bootstrap
left
off
onto
the
present,
which
was
yesterday
and
so
continued
running
until
until
this
morning,
when
I
I
finished
the
test,
so
that
that
bootstrap
does
does
work,
but
obviously
we
do
need
to
figure
out.
There's
there's
a
bug
in
there
somewhere,
whereby
we're
missing
quite
a
few,
quite
a
few
blocks
out
of
the
millions
that
we
download.
C
I've
been
looking
at
this
API
and
integration
with
me
and
I
noticed
that
sometimes
transaction
kind
of
hard
to
process
by
Network,
so
I
noticed
in
particular
contract
creation
transactions.
I
am
able
to
see
them
in
the
gas
tracker.
So
that
means
that
propagated
to
the
network
correctly.
But
it
takes
even
a
few
minutes
to
mind
just
a
single
simple
contract
creation
transaction
and
for
just
the
body
transfer.
It
takes
usually
a
few
seconds.
So
that's
quite
interesting
and
actually
I'm
right
now,
trying
to
debug
that
and
see
what's
going
on,
okay.
A
D
Yeah,
so
I
was
mostly
doing
testing
on
Amazon
instances.
Just
launching
the
our
client
with
different
scenarios
and
I
did
some
tests
that
you
already
mentioned,
like
starting
the
client
with
the
bootstrap
data
and
doing
several
singing
a
test
within
our
client
as
a
server,
and
that's
where
we
found
the
issue
with
some
missing
blocks
and
also
I
ran
the
whole
mist
integration
test
again
and
it
went
pretty
well,
everything
seems
to
be
working
just
fine.
So
basically
those
were
the
tests.
A
Did
we
actually
get
I
know?
One
of
the
tests
you
were
doing
was
where
we
were
using
our
client
as
the
as
the
server
basically
and
another
of
our
clients,
as
as
the
client,
that's
downloading,
from
the
server.
But
we
could
we
didn't
bring
that
to
if
to
a
successful
conclusion,
because
we
found
basically
the
missing
blocks
error
right.
Yes,.
D
A
D
A
Okay,
so,
hopefully
assuming
we
can
find
out
what's
going
on
with
our
with
the
missing
with
the
missing
blocks
over
the
next
day,
or
so
we
might
be
able
to
rerun
that
towards
the
end
of
the
week,
and
just
and
lock
that,
on
as
a
report
and
on
the
on
the
wiki,
all
going
well
I
mean
that's.
That
might
be
a
little
bit
optimistic,
but
that
would
be
the
best-case
scenario.
A
C
A
E
E
E
A
E
E
A
I
guess
I
mean
when
it
so
when
it
comes
down
to
brass
tacks,
we
we
we
won't
have
a
P
or
with
anything
for
the
VM,
in
other
words,
is
not
going
to
it,
wouldn't
affect
the
quality
of
our
our
VM.
These
changes
right
I'm,
just
trying
to
strike
I'm
struggling
to
these
changes,
seem
to
fall
between
two
stools.
Just
that
we
haven't
found
any
bugs
in
the
VM,
but
we've
needed
to
made
some
changes.
E
E
A
E
E
That's
what
the
documentation
says
that
whenever
there
are
no
expectations,
we
should
expect
an
error,
but
when
I
tried
that
I
got
a
whole
lot
of
new
failures
and
I
am
a
lysosome
code
and
there
is
from
the
first
look,
there's
no
way
that
code
could
fail
under
any
circumstances,
so
I'm
thinking
us
for
some
of
those
tests.
Those
expectations
may
may
have
simply
been
overloads
and
they're
not
meant.
A
E
From
the
VM
from
the
VM,
sweet,
sweet,
I
think
they're
passing
all
the
tests.
However,
the
a
bunch
of
other
groups,
I,
would
say
more
important
ones
like
blockchain
tests,
which
are
seem
to
be
more
integrating
ones
and
there's
a
site
where
virus
clients
reports
they
their
test
results,
and
it
seems
from
those
reports
that
many
of
those
tests
are
finding
those
files,
especially
those
blockchain
tests.
A
Okay,
okay,
so
that
is
a
an
area
that
we
need
to
I
guess
dig
into
a
bit
further
I
mean
even
beyond
once
we
get
the
VM
suite
sorted.
A
you're
gonna
you're
gonna
put
the
report
on
the
on
the
wiki
and
just
detail
the
results,
and
then
we
will
have
to
talk
about
I,
guess
the
next
area
in
that
whole
suite
to
try
and
to
try
and
tackle
and
probably
work
our
way
through
the
definitely
work
our
way
through
the
important
ones
over
over
time.
Yes,
sterling.
Okay,
all
right!
A
A
So
it's
a
fine
balance
there
between
I
mean
we
want
to
get
the
P
Wars
through,
but
at
the
same
time,
there's
no
point
in
in
getting
a
P
or
through
if
it's
gonna,
if
it's
not
if
its
own,
actually
bring
us
backwards
and
quality
in
terms
of
forward
so
I'm
glad
that
people
are
looking
closely
at
them
and
not
afraid
to
put
comments
on
them
and
slow
them
up.
That's
for
the
best,
and
so
those
peers,
I,
think,
are
almost
through
and
there's
one
I
guess
outstanding,
reasonably
serious
issue.
A
Although
whether
or
not
it's
a
blocker
I
suppose
it
probably
needs
to
be
needs
to
be
discussed,
I
don't
think
it
is
which
is
the
the
missing
missing
blocks.
But
we
will
will
them
we'll
be
working
pretty
hard
on
that
over
the
next
at
least
next
day
or
two,
and
then,
when
we
get
all
that
sorted,
we
will
be
going
back
through
all
of
these
tests
yet
again
and
regressing
for
possibly
at
least
a
third
or
four
time
for
some
people
in
preparation
for
next
Tuesday.