paritytech / paritytech/web3-storage

[ProvideNode] Design/Architecture of provider node

Open
#40 4 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Rust
Stars
12
Forks
3
Avg merge
2d 2h
Merged PRs (30d)
33

Description

Should we have one referential implementation of provider-node with L0 bucket system including support for L1 everything (file-system, s3-system, ...)?

Or should we have dedicated ones:

  • L0-provider-node
  • L1-file-system-provider-node
  • L2-s3-provider-node

Note: Basically, all dedicated ones would be just as "extension on the top" of L0-provider-node. Other words, use bucket system underneath.


The question also is, if the L1 supports (file-system, S3, ...) should be part of the provider node or just client API level, which works with Buckets (store some metadata file to buckets..)

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

No files or tests are named. Start by mapping the provider-node and bucket-system concepts, including the L0, L1, and L2 options and the client API boundary. Done means the project has a decided architecture for provider nodes and for where filesystem and S3 support belongs.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
rust
Domain
api, backend
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.