187-4 Add a consistency check for the tezos-specific fork detector #899
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
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
branch
from
8ea45fd
to
f33e0bb
Compare
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-4-tezos-consistent-fork-detector
branch
from
83e56d1
to
96f73fd
Compare
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
branch
from
f33e0bb
to
6fc5578
Compare
vishakh
changed the base branch from
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
to
master
vishakh
changed the base branch from
master
to
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-4-tezos-consistent-fork-detector
branch
from
681938b
to
ff8d4ee
Compare
vishakh
approved these changes
Sep 25, 2020
| * consistent results. | ||
| * It might happen that network calls to both services were not fast enough, to the | ||
| * point that the fork on which the reference node was at the time of detection changed | ||
| * during the algorthm execution. This might be a reasonable expectation in a highly |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixed, and I additionally rephrased the "locally consistent" definition, trying to make it easier to understand.
|
|
||
| /** Here we verify the properties of the [[ConsistentForkDetector]] implementation. | ||
| * This spec works essentially in the same way as | ||
| * the [[tech.cryptonomic.conseil.indexer.ForkDetectorSpec]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The package name is incorrect.
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
branch
from
abe65cc
to
ce17921
Compare
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-4-tezos-consistent-fork-detector
branch
from
f1aaf4c
to
72affdd
Compare
ivanopagano
changed the base branch from
feature/187-3-fork-handling-simulation
to
master
* correct all database types for level as bigint * correct all code modeling levels to use the new alias * give an explicit class to BlockReference for better matching * simplify the node operator tests and add explanatory comments * add test case for loading blocks not indexed in db
* add some log about random generation results during tests * fix an incorrect test
* correct all database types for level as bigint * correct all code modeling levels to use the new alias * give an explicit class to BlockReference for better matching * simplify the node operator tests and add explanatory comments * add test case for loading blocks not indexed in db
* add a checker to match the fork level block predecessor with the one stored by the indexer * define a property spec similar to the generic detector
ivanopagano
force-pushed
the
feature/187-4-tezos-consistent-fork-detector
branch
from
72affdd
to
ae1917b
Compare
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
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.
Related to #42 and #187
The currently available detector works under the assumption that the search for the fork level will be fast enough for the node to remain "stable".
That means that if the node "jumps" to a different fork while the detector is executing the search, we might get in serious trouble.
For Tezos is sounds reasonable that this might occur, even if only by a remote chance.
To handle the situation a more robust detector is defined to use with tezos specifically (since it involved data that is block-specific), which does a double-check before committing to the identified fork level.
NOTE This is part of a long-running streak of PRs to define the overall fork handling strategy.
Before merging it we need to merge the previous PRs #896 #898 and rebase on the new
masterbranch, after which thedrafttag could be removed.