Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

AWS Billing Test: fake blob store #33

Open
hannahhoward opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #35
Open

AWS Billing Test: fake blob store #33

hannahhoward opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #35
Assignees

Comments

@hannahhoward
Copy link
Member

What

Currently, blob/accept contains a check to make sure a blob is present in the blob store before it is accepted.

We should make a version of the blob store (https://github.com/storacha/storage/blob/main/pkg/store/blobstore/interface.go) whose get method never returns an error, and whose put method is a no-op. The get should return nil for actual data

Why

We want to run an aws billing test that simulates all of the infra costs for the services we will run ourselves in a warm storage tier. However, the storage node is not run by us, and moreover, we can simulate the upload pipeline without actually doing data transfer to the storage node, which will enable us to test MUCH faster.

This will be the code required to make the storage node behave as if it received the data without actually receiving the data -- note in a real world scenario they'd need to submit PDP proofs so this isn't an actual attack vector.

This code probably shouldn't get merged to main.

@hannahhoward hannahhoward moved this to Sprint Backlog in Storacha Project Planning Feb 12, 2025
@volmedo volmedo self-assigned this Feb 12, 2025
@volmedo volmedo linked a pull request Feb 12, 2025 that will close this issue
@volmedo volmedo moved this from Sprint Backlog to In Progress in Storacha Project Planning Feb 13, 2025
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: In Progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants