SIMD-0392: Relaxation of post-execution min_balance check

[igor56D]

No description provided.

[t-nelson]

a few nits, but lgtm assuming we choose to go the grandfather route. i'm not totally sold that the disruption will be so big a deal

[brooksprumo]

Hi, checking in on the status of the SIMD. Is it ready for another round of reviews? (If yes, I suggest requesting re-reviews from folks.) Has there been any testing on a local cluster to mimic a rent increase, esp w.r.t. stake accounts?

[igor56D]

Hi, checking in on the status of the SIMD. Is it ready for another round of reviews? (If yes, I suggest requesting re-reviews from folks.) Has there been any testing on a local cluster to mimic a rent increase, esp w.r.t. stake accounts?

1. I'm in the process of wrapping up the implementation for this and 0389. I'll push it up later today as a draft PR. Also working on setting up tests for a local cluster, which should be ready shortly as well.
2. I think the main open question right now is how (if at all) any core/system programs need to be updated as a result of this change. The stake program may require some tweaks to avoid using the rent sysvar for determining delegation amount. I believe @2501babe is looking into potential changes in the SPL token programs.

[2501babe]

spl-token, spl-token-2022, and p-token have no issues, we would do similar to stake program and hardcode the maximum rent. im not aware of any programs other than these and stake that are affected. we can start the change process whenever this is accepted

we should also put that maximum in the simd, maybe under "new terminology" or "proposed changes"

[brooksprumo]

Overall looks good to me! Some nits/questions:

[brooksprumo]

Looks good to me. I defer to @2501babe for all stake-related considerations.

[t-nelson]

... assuming we choose to go the grandfather route.

when/where was this decided?

[igor56D]

... assuming we choose to go the grandfather route.

when/where was this decided?

When this proposal is merged, I guess. If there are alternatives you still think may be better then we can discuss them here.

[t-nelson]

it's in the discussion #399 (comment)

[igor56D]

it's in the discussion #399 (comment)

We can continue the discussion there if you prefer. I believe I was the last person to comment on the topic (ref).

[topointon-jump]

Will this be part of the calculate_min_balance calculation? I don't see this legacy_min_balance used anywhere else in this proposal - am I missing something?

[igor56D]

you're not missing anything, I just included this to show how the min balance is currently calculated with references to the relevant constants in case people weren't familiar. Not really relevant to the rest of the content.