Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle dao state conflicts better #2674

Merged

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

commented Apr 8, 2019

  • Check if conflicting node is seed node or not. Show info in list entry
    and only show resync button and red color in text if conflict is with
    seed node.
  • At resync move all p2p network data to a dedicated directory so they
    will be reloaded from the seeds.
Handle dao state conflicts better
- Check if conflicting node is seed node or not. Show info in list entry
and only show resync button and red color in text if conflict is with
seed node.
- At resync move all p2p network data to a dedicated directory so they
will be reloaded from the seeds.

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer requested review from ripcurlx and sqrrm Apr 8, 2019

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer added the in:dao label Apr 8, 2019

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer added this to the v1.0.0 milestone Apr 8, 2019

@ManfredKarrer

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Apr 8, 2019

@sqrrm @ripcurlx
I am not sure if we shoud merge that into 1.0.0 or keep it for later. It is not high risk but also not trivial to test. I tested quite a bit though... It should not introduce much risk as well.
Lets discuss if we should add it or not. Would at least reduce confusion if some peers are out of sync as we have seen in dao-regtest last days... Also the missing file deletion of proposals, blind votes and ballots would not have lead to a recovery in current release if the cause for the issue is that one of those db files is out of sync.

@sqrrm
Copy link
Member

left a comment

I think it's worth adding this before 1.0 as it would avoid a lot of extra support issues from conflicted non seed nodes. It's also likely that users will be able to recover through the UI with this resync from seed feature.

No ACK until my comments are taken care of though.

ManfredKarrer added some commits Apr 9, 2019

@sqrrm

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 9, 2019

utACK

This version I think is worth merging before 1.0, it's not that complex and much time will be saved by not having users worry about client not in synch.

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer merged commit 2945150 into bisq-network:master Apr 9, 2019

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer deleted the ManfredKarrer:add-more-info-to-dao-monitor branch Apr 10, 2019

@sqrrm sqrrm referenced this pull request May 7, 2019

Open

Cycle 1 #282

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.