perf: performance test for async vote verification #5249
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5249 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 53.78% 53.70% -0.08%
==========================================
Files 450 444 -6
Lines 56201 55669 -532
==========================================
- Hits 30226 29899 -327
+ Misses 23626 23436 -190
+ Partials 2349 2334 -15 see 32 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
agreement/asyncVoteVerifier_test.go
Outdated
| func TestAsyncVerificationVotes(t *testing.T) { | ||
| partitiontest.PartitionTest(t) | ||
| errProb := float32(0.5) | ||
| sendReceiveVoteVerifications(false, errProb, 200, 0, t, nil) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could you make 200 and 0 named constants?
agreement/asyncVoteVerifier_test.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| wg := sync.WaitGroup{} | ||
| wg.Add(2) | ||
| if b != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit/suggestion: pass T and B as a single testing.TB interface and type assert here to B to access ResetTimer func. There will be the same if cond is it is now here but no if/else at the end of the func
agreement/asyncVoteVerifier_test.go
Outdated
| votes = make([]*unVoteTest, count) | ||
| eqVotes = make([]*unEqVoteTest, eqCount) | ||
| errsV = make(map[int]error) | ||
| errsEv = make(map[int]error) |
agreement/asyncVoteVerifier_test.go
Outdated
| vi := 0 | ||
| evi := 0 | ||
| for c := 0; c < count+eqCount; c++ { | ||
| // pick a vote if there are vots, and if either there are no eqVotes or the relative prob |
agreement/asyncVoteVerifier_test.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| nextErrType := 0 | ||
| for c := 0; c < count; c++ { | ||
| errType := 99 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
make errType a enum with few named values ?
type errType int
const badSig errType = 0
const noErr errType = 99
why does voteOptions return 9 and voteEqOptions - 10 ? what do these magic numbers mean?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are the different invalid types produced. EqVotes have one more error.
I don't see the utility to give each number a named variable, but if you see a benefit in doing so, I would do it.
They are enumerated to loop through them and diversify the invalid types.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but one of them is actually named notSelected. Does not matter much tho but at least 99 could be named
This is a test/benchmark for async vote verification.
This is primarily to evaluated the performance gain from batching the vote verification task.