Bug Fix 4424 - non determinism in deposits #4435
Merged
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
|
Build Error! No Linked Issue found. Please link an issue or mention it in the body using #<issue_id> |
|
Build Error! No Linked Issue found. Please link an issue or mention it in the body using #<issue_id> |
ze97286
changed the title
|
Build Error! No Linked Issue found. Please link an issue or mention it in the body using #<issue_id> |
wwestgarth
approved these changes
Nov 23, 2021
EVODelavega
approved these changes
Nov 23, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
close #4424
Explanation: banking engine got a number of asset actions for the same ethereum transactions. The asset actions are stored in a map by a unique identifier. When the asset action is first seen it will finalise the action (in this case the deposit). Nodes iterate over the map and process the asset actions sequentially - this leads to non-determinism - in this case, the each node have taken a different asset action and finalised a different deposit which lead to all nodes having different hash.
A good example to this in action is here: https://jenkins.ops.vega.xyz/blue/organizations/jenkins/system-tests%2Fsystem-tests/detail/system-tests/936/pipeline/384
log for node0: https://jenkins.ops.vega.xyz/blue/rest/organizations/jenkins/pipelines/system-tests/pipelines/LNL-create-restore/runs/922/nodes/386/steps/426/log/?start=0
log for node1: https://jenkins.ops.vega.xyz/blue/rest/organizations/jenkins/pipelines/system-tests/pipelines/system-tests/runs/936/nodes/386/steps/427/log/?start=0
log for node2: https://jenkins.ops.vega.xyz/blue/rest/organizations/jenkins/pipelines/system-tests/pipelines/LNL-create-restore/runs/922/nodes/385/steps/428/log/?start=0
It can be seen that the loss of consensus follows the error of "chain event reference a transaction already processed".