|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Been reading the comments.
2 channels would make sense when, for example:
Org 1-5 keep the same data. They will see chain code 1, and ledger 1. Let's say servers.
Majority orgs approve, meaning 3
Been reading the comments.
2 channels would make sense when, for example:
Org 1-5 keep the same data. They will see chain code 1, and ledger 1. Let's say servers.
Majority orgs approve, meaning 3
|
By
Mahwish Anwar
·
#9986
·
|
|
Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere - Fri, 05/07/2021 11:00am-12:00pm
#cal-reminder
Reminder: Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere
When: Friday, 7 May 2021, 11:00am to 12:00pm, (GMT-04:00) America/New
Reminder: Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere
When: Friday, 7 May 2021, 11:00am to 12:00pm, (GMT-04:00) America/New
|
By
fabric@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <fabric@...>
·
#9985
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Hi Nikos,
Remember that a channel basically represents a single ledger. So if you only need a single ledger you only need a single channel.
Regarding your comment “use the most (if not
Hi Nikos,
Remember that a channel basically represents a single ledger. So if you only need a single ledger you only need a single channel.
Regarding your comment “use the most (if not
|
By
Todd Little
·
#9984
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Really thank you all. So the paragraph Endorsement Policy here is wrong (I have seen it to other links too)?
As far as for the privacy, I understand that in a single channel network is there is no way
Really thank you all. So the paragraph Endorsement Policy here is wrong (I have seen it to other links too)?
As far as for the privacy, I understand that in a single channel network is there is no way
|
By
Nikos Karamolegkos <nkaram@...>
·
#9983
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Endorsements are fundamentally based on the number of endorsing organizations, not the number of endorsing peers, since ultimately you want to ensure that organizations have executed and signed off on
Endorsements are fundamentally based on the number of endorsing organizations, not the number of endorsing peers, since ultimately you want to ensure that organizations have executed and signed off on
|
By
David Enyeart
·
#9982
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Hi NIkos,
Endorsement policies are based on organizations only, not the number of peers. Once an organization is added to the endorsement policy, they only need to deploy one peer to endorse a
Hi NIkos,
Endorsement policies are based on organizations only, not the number of peers. Once an organization is added to the endorsement policy, they only need to deploy one peer to endorse a
|
By
Nikhil Gupta
·
#9981
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Also, I am a bit confused with this "Endorsement policy is based on the number of endorsing peers from unique organizations, not the total number peers. For example if you have 10 orgs with 3 peers
Also, I am a bit confused with this "Endorsement policy is based on the number of endorsing peers from unique organizations, not the total number peers. For example if you have 10 orgs with 3 peers
|
By
Nikos Karamolegkos <nkaram@...>
·
#9980
·
|
|
Different World States DB as a mechanism for data isolation
#fabric-questions
Hi, I am using cross-chaincode to take advantage of the fact that I can store data in isolation in different world states. However, I am not clear whether storing in different world states offers
Hi, I am using cross-chaincode to take advantage of the fact that I can store data in isolation in different world states. However, I am not clear whether storing in different world states offers
|
By
Santiago Figueroa Lorenzo
·
#9979
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Sorry, I used SC for smart-contract.
So "A majority of peers in the channel must endorse transactions of a specific type" means that if one of M endorser peers endorse the
Sorry, I used SC for smart-contract.
So "A majority of peers in the channel must endorse transactions of a specific type" means that if one of M endorser peers endorse the
|
By
Nikos Karamolegkos <nkaram@...>
·
#9978
·
|
|
Re: Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
Endorsement policy is based on the number of endorsing peers from unique organizations, not the total number peers. For example if you have 10 orgs with 3 peers each, and you need a majority to
Endorsement policy is based on the number of endorsing peers from unique organizations, not the total number peers. For example if you have 10 orgs with 3 peers each, and you need a majority to
|
By
David Enyeart
·
#9977
·
|
|
Single Channel BC network. Is it a good approach?
I am thinking of building an BC network with N organization in one common channel. Each organization would have M peers. The transaction endorsement policy will be based in a number P of
I am thinking of building an BC network with N organization in one common channel. Each organization would have M peers. The transaction endorsement policy will be based in a number P of
|
By
Nikos Karamolegkos <nkaram@...>
·
#9976
·
|
|
Re: [External] : [Hyperledger Fabric] IoT with frequent data and possibly incorrect data sometimes
Thanks for all replies.
So, we are saying that,
ED register via REST. These ED can be same or different orgs.
ED send messages via REST with their tokens. I am using JWT. Any better option? This
Thanks for all replies.
So, we are saying that,
ED register via REST. These ED can be same or different orgs.
ED send messages via REST with their tokens. I am using JWT. Any better option? This
|
By
Mahwish Anwar
·
#9975
·
|
|
Re: Update expired orderer org admin certificate and orderer certs
#fabric-questions
#fabric-orderer
#signcerts
#fabric
Hi, I'm working on the solution proposed, now I'm using a cli peer to do my channel update operations, before doing that I set the following variables in the peer
Hi, I'm working on the solution proposed, now I'm using a cli peer to do my channel update operations, before doing that I set the following variables in the peer
|
By
Mattia Bolzonella
·
#9974
·
|
|
Re: [External] : [Hyperledger Fabric] IoT with frequent data and possibly incorrect data sometimes
Hi Nikos,
Yes, that’s one common approach we’ve seen. The EDs don’t have to belong to the same organization, they could send their data to different aggregators if desired based on some
Hi Nikos,
Yes, that’s one common approach we’ve seen. The EDs don’t have to belong to the same organization, they could send their data to different aggregators if desired based on some
|
By
Mark Rakhmilevich
·
#9973
·
|
|
Re: 回复: missing tags for go chaincode developement dependencies
We have chosen not to add version tags to the modules because they tend to evolve compatibly and are mostly disconnected from the fabric releases. For example, if you pull any version of
We have chosen not to add version tags to the modules because they tend to evolve compatibly and are mostly disconnected from the fabric releases. For example, if you pull any version of
|
By
Matthew Sykes
·
#9972
·
|
|
Re: Two peers disagree about transaction validity
Thanks Dave.
No CouchDB in the picture here - as you guessed; and SQLite/BDB in Oracle Blockchain Platform behaves the same way as GoLevelDB does when it comes to commits. So, I suppose we
Thanks Dave.
No CouchDB in the picture here - as you guessed; and SQLite/BDB in Oracle Blockchain Platform behaves the same way as GoLevelDB does when it comes to commits. So, I suppose we
|
By
Carlo Innocenti
·
#9971
·
|
|
Re: Two peers disagree about transaction validity
The only time we've seen something like this was back when the community CouchDB image had a bad configuration setting:
delayed_commits = true
With that configuration, it was possible for CouchDB to
The only time we've seen something like this was back when the community CouchDB image had a bad configuration setting:
delayed_commits = true
With that configuration, it was possible for CouchDB to
|
By
David Enyeart
·
#9970
·
|
|
Two peers disagree about transaction validity
Hi all.
I have an HLF network which has ended up in a situation where the stateDB of two virtually identical peers (same channel, same chaincode) diverged; digging into it, the problem is that a txn
Hi all.
I have an HLF network which has ended up in a situation where the stateDB of two virtually identical peers (same channel, same chaincode) diverged; digging into it, the problem is that a txn
|
By
Carlo Innocenti
·
#9969
·
|
|
Re: Purge Private Data - by individual transaction - on trigger
The only mention of the "private data store" aka "private writeset storage" is this sentence:
"Upon validation/commit, the private data is moved to their copy of the private state database and private
The only mention of the "private data store" aka "private writeset storage" is this sentence:
"Upon validation/commit, the private data is moved to their copy of the private state database and private
|
By
David Enyeart
·
#9968
·
|
|
Re: Update expired orderer org admin certificate and orderer certs
#fabric-questions
#fabric-orderer
#signcerts
#fabric
Yes, that is it. You got it!
Yes, that is it. You got it!
|
By
Chris Gabriel <alaskadd@...>
·
#9967
·
|