Log attestation's journey published by local validators #3534
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
twoeths
requested review from
dapplion,
g11tech,
mpetrunic and
wemeetagain
as code owners
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3534 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 36.64% 36.52% -0.12%
==========================================
Files 324 324
Lines 8954 8980 +26
Branches 1406 1410 +4
==========================================
- Hits 3281 3280 -1
- Misses 5530 5556 +26
- Partials 143 144 +1 |
|
Code Climate has analyzed commit d6124e4 and detected 1 issue on this pull request. Here's the issue category breakdown:
View more on Code Climate. |
g11tech
previously approved these changes
Dec 17, 2021
Performance Report✔️ no performance regression detected Full benchmark results
|
|
I think this log statements should be part of the validator monitor. And be activated behind a flag since this could be extremely verbose?. Also, consider using a sub-logger with different module name so it's easier to filter logs with grep. logger.child({module: "VMON"})
We already do that in the validator monitor |
twoeths
force-pushed
the
tuyen/log-attestation-journey
branch
from
bcf5b1e
to
d6124e4
Compare
dapplion
reviewed
Dec 17, 2021
| @@ -530,6 +530,11 @@ export function createLodestarMetrics( | |||
| help: "The delay between when the validator should send the attestation and when it was received", | |||
| labelNames: ["index", "src"], | |||
| }), | |||
| unaggregatedAttestationMissed: register.gauge<"index" | "subnet">({ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not correct since it doesn't mean it was missed. A better name would be
unaggregatedAttestationSubmittedNoSubnetPeers
but you should clarify if you are counting
- no mesh peers
- no peers in the same topic
dapplion
suggested changes
Dec 17, 2021
|
@tuyennhv What's the status of this? Waiting for some changes upstream? |
yeah, we also need to upgrade gossipsub-js, gossipsub-js also needs to work with latest libp2p-interface |
philknows
added
the
status-blocked
twoeths
force-pushed
the
tuyen/log-attestation-journey
branch
from
d6124e4
to
a7769d9
Compare
twoeths
removed
the
status-blocked
twoeths
force-pushed
the
tuyen/log-attestation-journey
branch
from
0efa9b3
to
c475345
Compare
twoeths
force-pushed
the
tuyen/log-attestation-journey
branch
from
c475345
to
757863b
Compare
dapplion
reviewed
Apr 12, 2022
| @@ -424,7 +423,6 @@ export function getValidatorApi({chain, config, logger, metrics, network, sync}: | |||
| async publishAggregateAndProofs(signedAggregateAndProofs) { | |||
| notWhileSyncing(); | |||
|
|
|||
| const seenTimestampSec = Date.now() / 1000; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
By removing the seenTimestamp from here, now the metric is slightly different:
- before: Tracks time attestation is received at the start of handling the REST call
- now: Track the time the attestation is published to gossip. I agree this is the one that matters to us
We should track both, or track the validation time individually. But can be done in a new PR
wemeetagain
reviewed
Apr 12, 2022
twoeths
commented
Apr 13, 2022
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const balance = balances && balances[index]; | ||
| if (balance !== undefined) { | ||
| metrics.validatorMonitor.prevEpochOnChainBalance.set({index}, balance); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (failedAttestation) { | ||
| logger.verbose("Failed attestation in previous epoch", { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
change this log level to debug
dapplion
reviewed
Apr 13, 2022
| const fork = this.config.getForkName(aggregateAndProof.message.aggregate.data.slot); | ||
| await this.publishObject<GossipType.beacon_aggregate_and_proof>( | ||
| return await this.publishObject<GossipType.beacon_aggregate_and_proof>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Change in all publish* methods for consistency
dapplion
approved these changes
Apr 13, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
We want to debug #3527 - missing attestations in mainnet
Description
Log attestation when it's published to topic and included in AggregateAndProof
Don't log when we receive gossip block because I think it's not worth to do so considering the performance to scan through all indices of aggregate and proofs, @dapplion let me know if there's a cheap way to do it. Once an attestation is included in AggregateAndProof, it's likely it's included in upcoming blocks.
part of #3527