Andy Nogueira

This is just to add more context to the problem. As Daniel said the problem is that with the `tendermint/wal/MsgInfo` written to the WAL which might be bigger than the...

Thanks for the feedback @cason. So if it's possible to change the logic and not write the vote extensions to the WAL and no major implication would occur that might...

Thanks @cason, I'm assuming this parameter would be a Consensus Parameter right ?

This seems to be an application concern, I'll leave this open for future reference but feel free to close in case there's no immediate action.

My understanding is that [PBTS will not be enabled by default](https://docs.cometbft.com/v1.0/explanation/core/proposer-based-timestamps#enabling-pbts). If enable is not enforced then I believe you might still need to keep `evidence.MaxAgeNumBlocks` around, or do a...

There are some refactoring on the re-checking logic happened in this PR #2268, maybe this will not solve the problem from the perspective @ValarDragon reported but just adding here for...

In the case of Backward jump, is it possible to reject the block proposal if the timestamp of the proposed block is older than the last block committed ?

Hi @xloem, could it be related to this ? Based on the version you're using https://github.com/cometbft/cometbft/issues/443

I agree that there are too many allocations in this logic, especially on `consensus/state`. Unfortunately the current logging logic allocates heap even if debug mode is not enabled. I've played...

Cool, I'll look into these other places too. If you can do a profile that would be amazing to validate the performance improvement