(6/6) [BUGFIX] Fix duplicate sequence number use case (Non-persistent ProtectedStoragePayloads) #3665
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
Instead of using a subclass that overwrites a value, utilize Guice to inject the real value of 10000 in the app and let the tests overwrite it with their own.
Remove unused imports and clean up some access modifiers now that the final test structure is complete
Previously, this interface was called each time an item was changed. This required listeners to understand performance implications of multiple adds or removes in a short time span. Instead, give each listener the ability to process a list of added or removed entrys which can help them avoid performance issues. This patch is just a refactor. Each listener is called once for each ProtectedStorageEntry. Future patches will change this.
Minor performance overhead for constructing MapEntry and Collections of one element, but keeps the code cleaner and all removes can still use the same logic to remove from map, delete from data store, signal listeners, etc. The MapEntry type is used instead of Pair since it will require less operations when this is eventually used in the removeExpiredEntries path.
…batch All current users still call this one-at-a-time. But, it gives the ability for the expire code path to remove in a batch.
This will cause HashMapChangedListeners to receive just one onRemoved() call for the expire work instead of multiple onRemoved() calls for each item. This required a bit of updating for the remove validation in tests so that it correctly compares onRemoved with multiple items.
…ch removes bisq-network#3143 identified an issue that tempProposals listeners were being signaled once for each item that was removed during the P2PDataStore operation that expired old TempProposal objects. Some of the listeners are very expensive (ProposalListPresentation::updateLists()) which results in large UI performance issues. Now that the infrastructure is in place to receive updates from the P2PDataStore in a batch, the ProposalService can apply all of the removes received from the P2PDataStore at once. This results in only 1 onChanged() callback for each listener. The end result is that updateLists() is only called once and the performance problems are reduced. This removes the need for bisq-network#3148 and those interfaces will be removed in the next patch.
Now that the only user of this interface has been removed, go ahead and delete it. This is a partial revert of f5d75c4 that includes the code that was added into ProposalService that subscribed to the P2PDataStore.
Write a test that shows the incorrect behavior for bisq-network#3629, the hashmap is rebuilt from disk using the 20-byte key instead of the 32-byte key.
Addresses the first half of bisq-network#3629 by ensuring that the reconstructed HashMap always has the 32-byte key for each payload. It turns out, the TempProposalStore persists the ProtectedStorageEntrys on-disk as a List and doesn't persist the key at all. Then, on reconstruction, it creates the 20-byte key for its internal map. The fix is to update the TempProposalStore to use the 32-byte key instead. This means that all writes, reads, and reconstrution of the TempProposalStore uses the 32-byte key which matches perfectly with the in-memory map of the P2PDataStorage that expects 32-byte keys. Important to note that until all seednodes receive this update, nodes will continue to have both the 20-byte and 32-byte keys in their HashMap.
Addresses the second half of bisq-network#3629 by using the HashMap, not the protectedDataStore to generate the known keys in the requestData path. This won't have any bandwidth reduction until all seednodes have the update and only have the 32-byte key in their HashMap. fixes bisq-network#3629
The only user has been migrated to getMap(). Delete it so future development doesn't have the same 20-byte vs 32-byte key issue.
In order to implement remove-before-add behavior, we need a way to verify that the SequenceNumberMap was the only item updated.
It is possible to receive a RemoveData or RemoveMailboxData message before the relevant AddData, but the current code does not handle it. This results in internal state updates and signal handler's being called when an Add is received with a lower sequence number than a previously seen Remove. Minor test validation changes to allow tests to specify that only the SequenceNumberMap should be written during an operation.
Now that we have introduced remove-before-add, we need a way to validate that the SequenceNumberMap was written, but nothing else. Add this feature to the validation path.
In order to aid in propagation of remove() messages, broadcast them in the event the remove is seen before the add.
Now that there are cases where the SequenceNumberMap and Broadcast are called, but no other internal state is updated, the existing helper functions conflate too many decisions. Remove them in favor of explicitly defining each state change expected.
julianknutsen
commented
Nov 22, 2019
| @@ -188,15 +188,5 @@ public void removeExpiredEntries_PurgeSeqNrMap() throws CryptoException, NoSuchA | |||
| SavedTestState beforeState = this.testState.saveTestState(purgedProtectedStorageEntry); | |||
| this.testState.mockedStorage.removeExpiredEntries(); | |||
| this.testState.verifyProtectedStorageRemove(beforeState, expectedRemoves, true, true, false, false, false); | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test was testing too much when just calling verifyProtectedStorageRemove() gives us what we want.
But, the failure did point out that we add expirable ProtectedStorageEntrys and then immediately expire them in the next expire cycle. I'll put this on my backlog to fix it. Not super urgent.
julianknutsen
force-pushed
the
fix-add-bug
branch
from
73b59e0
to
e932d1c
Compare
Fix a bug introduced in d484617 that did not properly handle a valid use case for duplicate sequence numbers. For in-memory-only ProtectedStoragePayloads, the client nodes need a way to reconstruct the Payloads after startup from peer and seed nodes. This involves sending a ProtectedStorageEntry with a sequence number that is equal to the last one the client had already seen. This patch adds tests to confirm the bug and fix as well as the changes necessary to allow adding of Payloads that were previously seen, but removed during a restart.
julianknutsen
force-pushed
the
fix-add-bug
branch
from
e932d1c
to
3d571c4
Compare
julianknutsen
changed the title
julianknutsen
changed the title
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.
Fixes: #3679
3d571c4
Fix a bug introduced in d484617 that
did not properly handle a valid use case for duplicate sequence numbers.
For in-memory-only ProtectedStoragePayloads, the client nodes need a way
to reconstruct the Payloads after startup from peer and seed nodes. This
involves sending a ProtectedStorageEntry with a sequence number that
is equal to the last one the client had already seen.
This patch adds tests to confirm the bug and fix as well as the changes
necessary to allow adding of Payloads that were previously seen, but
removed during a restart.