Skip to content

Conversation

@kbhargava-jump
Copy link
Contributor

@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump commented Oct 13, 2025

new commands:

build/native/gcc/bin/backtest --ci                                                                                                   CI LEDGERS
build/native/gcc/bin/backtest                                                                                                        ALL LEDGERS
build/native/gcc/bin/backtest mainnet-308392063-v2.3.0                                                                               SPECIFIC LEDGER
build/native/gcc/bin/backtest multi-bpf-loader-v2.3.0 --config path/to/config.toml                                                   SPECIFIC LEDGER + CONFIG (ex. solcap)
build/native/gcc/bin/backtest mainnet-368528500-perf --end-slot 368529500 --funk-pages 5 --index-max 2000000 --cluster-version 3.0.0 CUSTOM CONFIG

@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump changed the title Move backtest backtest: refactor out of firedancer-dev Oct 13, 2025
@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump force-pushed the move-backtest branch 4 times, most recently from 5669d35 to 1edc824 Compare October 15, 2025 15:03
@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump changed the title backtest: refactor out of firedancer-dev [WIP, DO NOT REVIEW] backtest: refactor out of firedancer-dev Oct 15, 2025
@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump marked this pull request as ready for review October 15, 2025 15:12
@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump marked this pull request as draft October 15, 2025 17:30
@kbhargava-jump kbhargava-jump force-pushed the move-backtest branch 3 times, most recently from 1600b97 to e9935c1 Compare October 16, 2025 20:01
@ripatel-fd
Copy link
Contributor

backtest must stay in firedancer-dev, if not firedancer main binary, since re-verifying a ledger is a common operator task that we should support

@kbhargava-jump
Copy link
Contributor Author

backtest must stay in firedancer-dev, if not firedancer main binary, since re-verifying a ledger is a common operator task that we should support

redoing in #7016. still a WIP

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants