feat: node warmup time for pull/pushsync protocols

[istae]

Node warmup delay for pull/pushsync protocols #2048

Depends on ethersphere/beekeeper#155

This change is 

[acud]

Reviewed 9 of 9 files at r1.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @esadakar and @zelig)

---

pkg/node/node.go, line 182 at r1 (raw file):

		warmupTime = time.Hour
	}

maybe we should move time.Hour to a const maxWarmupTime and return an error here?

---

pkg/puller/puller.go, line 76 at r1 (raw file):

		bins:       bins,
		warmupTime: warmupTime,

no need for the extra field, you can simply call go p.manage(warmupTime)

---

pkg/pusher/pusher.go, line 64 at r1 (raw file):

		quit:              make(chan struct{}),
		chunksWorkerQuitC: make(chan struct{}),
		warmupTime:        warmupTime,

here too

---

pkg/pushsync/pushsync.go, line 48 at r1 (raw file):

	ErrOutOfDepthReplication = errors.New("replication outside of the neighborhood")
	ErrNoPush                = errors.New("could not push chunk")
	ErrWarmup                = errors.New("could not push chunk")

error description should be changed

---

pkg/pushsync/pushsync.go, line 205 at r1 (raw file):

			if time.Now().Before(ps.warmupPeriod) {
				_ = stream.Reset()

since the stream will be reset anyway when the defer statement at the beginning of the handler executes, it is enough to just return ErrWarmup

[zelig]

Reviewed 9 of 9 files at r1.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 8 unresolved discussions (waiting on @acud and @esadakar)

---

pkg/node/node.go, line 178 at r1 (raw file):

	// upperbound on warmupTime for push/pullsync protocols
	warmupTime := o.WarmupTime

why need this complexity, if some set it long its their problem

---

pkg/puller/puller.go, line 76 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, acud (acud) wrote…

no need for the extra field, you can simply call go p.manage(warmupTime)

+1

---

pkg/puller/puller.go, line 103 at r1 (raw file):

	}()

	// wait for warmup duration to complete

this should only apply to storer nodes. lightnodes do not need to wait to push

---

pkg/pusher/pusher.go, line 94 at r1 (raw file):

	}()

	// wait for warmup duration to complete

only for storer nodes

[istae]

Reviewable status: 5 of 9 files reviewed, 8 unresolved discussions (waiting on @acud and @zelig)

---

pkg/node/node.go, line 178 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, zelig (Viktor Trón) wrote…

why need this complexity, if some set it long its their problem

Fair enough. Thanks.

---

pkg/node/node.go, line 182 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, acud (acud) wrote…

maybe we should move time.Hour to a const maxWarmupTime and return an error here?

Done.

---

pkg/puller/puller.go, line 76 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, zelig (Viktor Trón) wrote…

+1

Done.

---

pkg/puller/puller.go, line 103 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, zelig (Viktor Trón) wrote…

this should only apply to storer nodes. lightnodes do not need to wait to push

Done.

---

pkg/pusher/pusher.go, line 64 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, acud (acud) wrote…

here too

Done.

---

pkg/pusher/pusher.go, line 94 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, zelig (Viktor Trón) wrote…

only for storer nodes

Done.

---

pkg/pushsync/pushsync.go, line 48 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, acud (acud) wrote…

error description should be changed

Done.

---

pkg/pushsync/pushsync.go, line 205 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, acud (acud) wrote…

since the stream will be reset anyway when the defer statement at the beginning of the handler executes, it is enough to just return ErrWarmup

Done.

[acud]

Reviewed 4 of 4 files at r2.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @zelig)

[zelig]

Reviewed 4 of 4 files at r2.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @zelig)

[zelig]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @esadakar and @zelig)

---

pkg/node/node.go, line 178 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, esadakar (Esad Akar) wrote…

Fair enough. Thanks.

cool now

[acud]

@esadakar I think the integration tests are failing because of this right?