routerrpc: add queryprob rpc #3556
Conversation
joostjager
force-pushed
the
query-mc-prob
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b1e9859 to
9ec1007
Compare
Roasbeef
added
enhancement
joostjager
force-pushed
the
query-mc-prob
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2ea9411 to
8644ceb
Compare
carlaKC
left a comment
carlaKC
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, a few small nits about naming but overall a pretty straightforward.
routing/missioncontrol.go
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
now that these field are replicated both here and in pairResult, can this struct type be removed now?
lnrpc/routerrpc/router_server.go
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why don't do Unix() also when zero?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is a very negative number. The beginning of time.Time is far before 1970.
lnrpc/routerrpc/router.proto
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is the reason for PairData to reuse it here?
joostjager
force-pushed
the
query-mc-prob
branch
from
8644ceb to
73eba92
Compare
This prepares for decoupling the result interpretation of a single payment attempt from the information stored in mission control memory on the history of a node pair. A planned follow-up where we store both the last success and last failure requires this decoupling.
Prepares for this data structure being accessed in mission control rpc implementations.
With a separate proto message, it becomes possible to also return the pair data for a single pair. This prepares for the new mc probability querying rpc.
Probabilities are no longer returned for querymc calls. To still provide some insight into the mission control internals, this commit adds a new rpc that calculates a success probability estimate for a specific node pair and amount.
joostjager
force-pushed
the
query-mc-prob
branch
from
73eba92 to
fb57255
Compare
halseth
left a comment
halseth
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pretty straightforward diff, only exposing state that already exists within MC. LGTM 🎅
joostjager
changed the title
carlaKC
left a comment
carlaKC
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, adding approval post new changes being pushed to see whether my grey tick changes, but I don't think my review will count towards approvals: "At least 2 approving reviews are required by reviewers with write access".
4 participants
In #3462, we removed probability reporting for
querymc. This PR brings it back as a separate rpc for which a specific amount needs to be given.In addition to the probability, it also returns the raw data for the requested pair. An example use case for this is to get a sense for the freshness of a pair and use this to decide whether to do a prepay probe for a route.