Pruning logic #4194
Pruning logic #4194
Conversation
jackzhhuang
requested review from
sanlee42,
jolestar and
nkysg
as code owners
WalkthroughThe changes involve substantial updates to the blockchain system, primarily enhancing the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
sync/src/lib.rs (1)
13-13: Newparallelmodule added. Please provide more context.The addition of the
parallelmodule suggests an enhancement in the library's ability to handle concurrent operations or tasks, which could potentially improve performance or efficiency in relevant use cases.However, without more information on the specific implementations, functionalities, and intended use cases of the
parallelmodule, it's difficult to provide meaningful feedback on its correctness, performance impact, or alignment with the overall system architecture.Please consider adding a brief description or documentation explaining the purpose, key components, and usage of the
parallelmodule. This will help reviewers better understand the changes and provide more targeted feedback.flexidag/tests/tests.rs (2)
732-735: Consider removing the commented out print statement.If the commented out print statement is no longer needed, please remove it to keep the code clean.
990-1217: Consider adding more comments to improve readability.To enhance the readability and maintainability of the test, consider adding more comments explaining the purpose of each section or scenario within the test. This will make it easier for other developers to understand the test flow and the expected behavior.
chain/src/chain.rs (1)
321-328: Review the pruning point logic.The function correctly retrieves the DAG state and ghostdata to create the block template. However, setting the pruning point to zero might not be optimal. Please review if this is the intended behavior or if the pruning point should be calculated differently.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (31)
- chain/api/src/chain.rs (4 hunks)
- chain/src/chain.rs (13 hunks)
- chain/src/verifier/mod.rs (8 hunks)
- config/src/genesis_config.rs (9 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (6 hunks)
- flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/consensusdb/consensus_reachability.rs (1 hunks)
- flexidag/src/ghostdag/protocol.rs (3 hunks)
- flexidag/src/prune/pruning_point_manager.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/reachability/inquirer.rs (1 hunks)
- flexidag/src/types/ghostdata.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/types/ordering.rs (1 hunks)
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs (4 hunks)
- miner/src/create_block_template/mod.rs (2 hunks)
- node/src/node.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/Cargo.toml (1 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/mod.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/test_write_dag_block_chain.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/write_block_chain.rs (4 hunks)
- sync/src/lib.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/parallel/executor.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/parallel/mod.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/parallel/sender.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/store/sync_dag_store.rs (4 hunks)
- sync/src/store/tests.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/sync.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (8 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/inner_sync_task.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/mod.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/tests_dag.rs (0 hunks)
Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (1)
- sync/src/tasks/tests_dag.rs
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- flexidag/src/consensusdb/consensus_reachability.rs
- sync/src/store/tests.rs
Additional comments not posted (93)
sync/src/parallel/mod.rs (1)
1-2: LGTM!The code is creating a new directory structure by declaring submodules
executorandsender. The access modifiers are correctly specified, withexecutorbeing private andsenderbeing public. The changes look good!flexidag/src/types/ordering.rs (4)
38-42: LGTM!The struct is correctly defined with the required fields
hashandblue_work.
44-48: LGTM!The constructor method is correctly implemented for instantiating
SortableBlockWithWorkType.
50-54: LGTM!The
PartialEqtrait implementation is correct and consistent with thePartialEqimplementation forSortableBlock.
56-60: LGTM!The
PartialOrdtrait implementation is correct and consistent with thePartialOrdimplementation forSortableBlock.sync/src/block_connector/mod.rs (2)
6-6: LGTM!The import statement for the
Versiontype is correct and necessary for using it in theMinerRequeststruct.
51-53: Looks good!The addition of the
versionfield to theMinerRequeststruct is implemented correctly. Making the field public allows external code to set the version information as needed.This change enhances the mining request functionality by enabling better management of version-specific logic or features.
flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (3)
42-42: LGTM!The change to the
insertmethod signature in theDagStateStoretrait, which now takes ahashparameter in addition to thestate, is a good improvement. This explicit association of states with hashes enhances the integrity and traceability of stored data.
69-69: LGTM!The
insertmethod implementation inDbDagStateStorehas been correctly updated to use the providedhashparameter when writing the state. This change aligns with the updated trait declaration and contributes to the explicit and safer handling of state data.
71-71: LGTM!Passing the
hashparameter to thewritemethod ofdag_state_accessis the correct way to propagate the hash value to the underlying storage layer. This change maintains consistency with the updatedinsertmethod signature and contributes to the explicit association of states with hashes.flexidag/src/prune/pruning_point_manager.rs (2)
46-46: LGTM!The early return when
current_pruning_pointequalsnext_pruning_pointis a reasonable optimization that avoids unnecessary processing. The change does not introduce any correctness issues or side effects.
78-78: Formatting change looks good.Adding a blank line before the log statement improves readability and adheres to good code formatting practices.
flexidag/src/types/ghostdata.rs (2)
6-6: LGTM!Adding the
PartialEqandEqtraits to the derive macro forGhostdagDatais a good change. It enables equality comparisons for instances of this struct, which can be useful in various contexts such as using the struct in collections that require unique elements or in algorithms that depend on comparing instances. The change is safe and does not introduce any breaking changes.
17-17: LGTM!Adding the
PartialEqandEqtraits to the derive macro forCompactGhostdagDatais a good change. It enables equality comparisons for instances of this struct, which can be useful in various contexts such as using the struct in collections that require unique elements or in algorithms that depend on comparing instances. The change is safe and does not introduce any breaking changes.sync/src/store/sync_dag_store.rs (3)
6-6: LGTM!The import of
REACHABILITY_DATA_CFis valid and does not introduce any issues.
67-67: LGTM!The addition of
REACHABILITY_DATA_CFto the list of column families is valid and aligns with the import of the constant. This change enhances the database schema to accommodate reachability data.
76-76: LGTM!Passing a cloned reference of
dbtoSyncAbsentBlockStore::newis a valid change. It ensures thatSyncAbsentBlockStorehas its own independent reference to the database, potentially improving thread safety and preventing unintended side effects from shared references.chain/api/src/chain.rs (5)
26-29: LGTM!The addition of the
ghostdatafield to theVerifiedBlockstruct is a meaningful enhancement that allows for the storage of ghost data alongside the block. The use ofOptiontype provides flexibility in handling the presence or absence of ghost data.This change aligns well with the PR objective of introducing pruning logic and the overall goal of integrating ghost data within the block verification and management process.
112-116: Clarify the usage and impact of theverify_and_ghostdatamethod.The addition of the
verify_and_ghostdatamethod to theChainReadertrait is a significant enhancement that aligns with the PR objective of introducing pruning logic and the overall goal of enhancing block verification and ghost data handling.To ensure a clear understanding of this method's role in the verification process, please provide answers to the following questions:
- How does the
verify_and_ghostdatamethod fit into the overall block verification flow? Is it called before or after other verification steps?- What is the significance of the
unclesparameter in the verification process? How are the uncles' block headers utilized?- How does the returned
GhostdagDataimpact the subsequent steps in the verification process or other parts of the codebase?Clarifying these aspects will help maintain a coherent understanding of the verification process and the role of ghost data within it.
117-117: LGTM!The addition of the
is_dag_ancestor_ofmethod to theChainReadertrait is a valuable enhancement that aligns with the PR objective of introducing pruning logic and the overall goal of enhancing DAG verification processes.The method's functionality to check if a given ancestor is a DAG ancestor of specified descendants is crucial for verifying the relationship between blocks in a DAG structure. This check is essential for maintaining the integrity of the DAG and ensuring proper block organization.
129-130: Clarify the specific use case and differences from theapplymethod.The addition of the
apply_for_syncmethod to theChainWritertrait is a noteworthy enhancement that aligns with the PR objective of introducing pruning logic and the overall goal of enhancing block verification and chain management.To ensure a clear understanding of this method's purpose and its relationship to the existing
applymethod, please provide answers to the following questions:
- What specific synchronization scenario does the
apply_for_syncmethod cater to? How does it differ from the regular block application flow handled by theapplymethod?- Are there any differences in the verification, execution, or connection steps performed by
apply_for_synccompared toapply?- Are there any considerations or constraints that determine when to use
apply_for_syncinstead ofapply?Clarifying these aspects will help maintain a clear understanding of the block application process and the role of the
apply_for_syncmethod within it.
109-109: Verify the usage of thepruning_pointparameter.The modification to the
current_tips_hashmethod to accept thepruning_pointparameter is a logical change that aligns with the PR objective of introducing pruning logic. The parameter likely influences the computation of the current tips' hash, considering the pruning point.Please ensure that the
pruning_pointparameter is properly provided when calling thecurrent_tips_hashmethod throughout the codebase. Run the following script to verify its usage:Verification successful
The
pruning_pointparameter is properly used in thecurrent_tips_hashmethod calls.The verification confirms that the
pruning_pointparameter is consistently provided in thecurrent_tips_hashmethod calls across the codebase. This aligns with the intended change and ensures that the pruning logic is integrated correctly.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `pruning_point` parameter in `current_tips_hash` method calls. # Test: Search for the method usage. Expect: Occurrences with the `pruning_point` argument. rg --type rust -A 5 $'current_tips_hash'Length of output: 1731
sync/src/tasks/inner_sync_task.rs (1)
148-148: LGTM!The declaration of the
block_collectorvariable using theBlockCollector::new_with_handlemethod aligns with the refactoring efforts mentioned in the AI-generated summary. The removal of themutkeyword indicates that the variable is not intended to be mutable after initialization, which is a reasonable design choice.The
block_collectorseems to play a crucial role in collecting and managing blocks as part of the synchronization process. The initialization takes several parameters, suggesting that it relies on various data and dependencies to perform its tasks effectively.Overall, this code change appears to be a step towards simplifying the control flow and improving the handling of absent blocks during synchronization.
sync/src/block_connector/test_write_dag_block_chain.rs (1)
53-55: Verify the consistency of thecurrent_tips_hashmethod change across the codebase.The change to pass the pruning point to
current_tips_hashmethod seems reasonable as it incorporates the pruning logic into the retrieval of current tips. This could affect the resulting block template.Please ensure that this change is consistently applied across the codebase wherever
current_tips_hashis used. You can use the following script to verify:Verification successful
The change to the
current_tips_hashmethod is consistently applied across the codebase.The method is consistently used with a pruning point argument in all instances, and the method's definition and signature reflect this requirement. No further action is needed.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of the `current_tips_hash` method change across the codebase. # Test: Search for the method usage. Expect: All occurrences to pass the pruning point. rg --type rust -A 5 $'current_tips_hash'Length of output: 1731
sync/src/parallel/sender.rs (7)
21-26: LGTM!The struct is well-defined with appropriate field types and visibility.
28-37: LGTM!The struct is well-defined with appropriate field types and visibility.
40-59: LGTM!The constructor method correctly initializes the struct fields using the provided parameters.
61-100: LGTM!The method correctly implements the logic for dispatching a block to an available worker. It iterates through the executors, checks their state, and sends the block to a suitable worker if found.
102-145: LGTM!The method correctly implements the logic for processing absent blocks from the sync DAG store. It iterates through the blocks, dispatches them to available workers or creates new workers if needed, flushes the executor state, waits for all workers to finish, and deletes the processed blocks from the sync DAG store.
147-173: LGTM!The method correctly implements the logic for flushing the state of the executors. It iterates through the workers, checks their receiver channel for executed blocks, notifies the chain operator, updates the worker's state, handles disconnected channels, and retains only the active workers.
175-217: LGTM!The method correctly implements the logic for waiting for all workers to finish execution. It signals the workers to exit, enters a loop to check for executed blocks, notifies the chain operator, handles disconnected channels, breaks the loop when all workers are closed, and awaits the join handle of each worker to ensure they have finished.
miner/src/create_block_template/mod.rs (2)
116-116: LGTM!The addition of the
versionparameter toMinerRequestis a valid way to pass the block header version to thecreate_block_templatefunction. The change is consistent with the AI-generated summary.
192-192: Verify the usage of thepruning_pointfield.The addition of the
pruning_pointfield toMinerResponseis a valid change that aligns with the overall theme of introducing pruning logic. However, please verify how thepruning_pointis being used in the codebase to ensure it is being handled correctly.Run the following script to verify the usage of
pruning_point:Verification successful
The
pruning_pointfield is used correctly and extensively in the codebase.The
pruning_pointfield is integrated into various components, including block headers and DAG state management, and is involved in the pruning logic. Its usage in both production and test code indicates thorough handling and testing. This aligns with the PR's theme of enhancing pruning logic.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `pruning_point` field in the codebase. # Test 1: Search for the usage of `pruning_point` in the codebase. Expect: Relevant code segments that use `pruning_point` for pruning logic. rg --type rust -A 5 $'pruning_point'Length of output: 36201
sync/src/parallel/executor.rs (4)
25-53: LGTM!The
DagBlockExecutorstruct and itsnewmethod are implemented correctly. The struct contains the necessary fields for parallel block execution, and thenewmethod properly initializes the struct with the provided dependencies and sets up the communication channels.
55-65: LGTM!The
waiting_for_parentsmethod is implemented correctly. It efficiently checks the availability of parent blocks in theBlockDAGby iterating over the parent hashes and using thehas_dag_blockmethod. The method returns the expected boolean value based on the presence of all parent blocks.
67-210: LGTM!The
start_to_executemethod is implemented correctly and follows the expected flow for parallel block execution. It properly spawns a new task usingtokio::spawnto handle block execution concurrently.The method correctly waits for the parent blocks to be available using the
waiting_for_parentsmethod before proceeding with the execution. It creates or forks theBlockChaininstance based on the block's parent hash, ensuring the correct chain state is used for execution.The usage of the
DagVerifierWithGhostDataverifier during theapply_with_verifiermethod call ensures that the block is verified with the necessary ghost data, maintaining the integrity of the blockchain.Finally, the method sends the execution result (executed block or error) back to the main task using the sender channel, allowing the main task to handle the result appropriately.
Overall, the
start_to_executemethod is well-structured and handles the parallel block execution process correctly.
1-211: Proper use of dependencies and error handling.The file makes appropriate use of dependencies from various
starcoincrates, such asstarcoin_chain,starcoin_chain_api,starcoin_config,starcoin_crypto,starcoin_dag,starcoin_executor,starcoin_logger,starcoin_storage, andstarcoin_types. These dependencies provide the necessary functionality for theDagBlockExecutorto perform parallel block execution.The usage of
anyhowfor error handling and propagation is suitable, as it allows for convenient error management and provides meaningful error messages.The file leverages
tokiofor asynchronous programming and concurrency, which is appropriate for the parallel block execution process. The usage oftokio::spawnand asynchronous channels enables efficient concurrent execution of blocks.The inclusion of
starcoin_loggerfor logging purposes is beneficial for monitoring and debugging the execution process. The log statements provide valuable insights into the flow of execution and help in identifying any issues or errors.Overall, the use of dependencies and error handling in the file is well-structured and aligns with the requirements of the
DagBlockExecutor.flexidag/src/reachability/inquirer.rs (1)
21-21: Verify if the expanded visibility ofinit_with_paramsis intended.The visibility of
init_with_paramshas been changed frompub(super)topub, making it accessible from any module within the crate. Please ensure that this expanded visibility is intended and document the reason for this change.chain/src/verifier/mod.rs (5)
10-11: LGTM!The new imports are necessary for the changes made in the file to incorporate ghost data handling.
81-90: LGTM!The changes are consistent with the updated
verify_unclesmethod signature and allow the ghost data to be associated with the verified block.
Line range hint
109-171: LGTM!The changes to the
verify_unclesmethod allow it to return ghost data related to the uncles, and handle the case when there are no uncles by returningNone.
326-340: LGTM!The changes to the
verify_blockandverify_unclesmethods ofNoneVerifierare consistent with the updated method signatures and the expected behavior of performing no verification.
Line range hint
344-475: LGTM!The new structs and implementations enhance the DAG verification process by incorporating ghost data handling. The modular design allows reuse of the header verification logic, and the
verify_unclesimplementations are consistent with the updated method signature.sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs (6)
17-17: LGTM!The addition of the
usestatement forstarcoin_chain::BlockChainis correct and necessary for using theBlockChaintype later in the code.
382-384: LGTM!The retrieval of the main block header and DAG is correct and necessary for the subsequent logic.
390-406: LGTM!The pruning logic based on the main block header's number and the pruning height is correctly implemented. The code handles the case when the block number is below the pruning height by using default values for the tips and pruning point.
411-413: LGTM!The use of
ok_or_elseimproves the error handling when selecting the parent block by providing a clearer error message if no blue blocks are found.
415-418: LGTM!The retrieval of the
time_service,storage, andvm_metricsfrom the service context is correct and necessary for creating a newBlockChaininstance.
420-427: LGTM!The creation of a new
BlockChaininstance using the selected parent block and the retrieved dependencies is correct. The code correctly retrieves the required information, such as the epoch, strategy, block gas limit, and previous header, for mining a new block.node/src/node.rs (1)
339-339: Simplification ofcheck_upgrademethod call looks good, but verify the method and its callers have been updated.The change simplifies the
check_upgrademethod call by only passing the head of the chain status, which should be sufficient for the upgrade check. Removing the storage parameter suggests the upgrade check no longer requires direct access to the storage.Please verify that the
check_upgrademethod in theBlockDAGstruct and all callers of this method have been updated to handle this parameter change correctly. You can use the following script to search for the method definition and its usages:Verification successful
Verification successful:
check_upgrademethod and its caller have been updated correctly.The
check_upgrademethod inflexidag/src/blockdag.rsnow accepts a singleBlockHeaderparameter, which aligns with the change innode/src/node.rswherechain_info.status().head()is passed. This confirms that the method and its caller have been updated to handle the parameter change correctly.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify `check_upgrade` method and its callers have been updated. # Test 1: Search for the method definition. Expect: Only new signature. rg --type rust -A 5 $'fn check_upgrade\(.*\)' # Test 2: Search for callers of the method. Expect: Only passing head as argument. rg --type rust -A 5 $'dag\.check_upgrade\('Length of output: 1935
flexidag/src/ghostdag/protocol.rs (5)
174-266: Comprehensive verification of blue blocks and ghost data. LGTM!The
verify_and_ghostdatafunction implements a thorough verification process for the given blue blocks and associated ghost data:
- Initializes new block data with the selected parent.
- Topologically sorts the mergeset blocks.
- Checks each blue candidate for k-cluster violations and colors them appropriately.
- Verifies the consistency of the blue set data.
- Calculates the final blue score and blue work.
The logic is correct and follows the expected steps. Error handling using
bail!is suitable for critical mismatches in the blue set.
268-336: Thorough validation of blue blocks against ghost data. Looks good!The
check_ghostdata_blue_blockfunction performs a robust validation of the blue blocks against the provided ghost data:
- Reconstructs the ghost data by processing the blue candidates.
- Verifies the consistency of the blue set between the reconstructed and original ghost data.
- Calculates the blue score and blue work for the reconstructed ghost data.
- Ensures the compact representations match between the reconstructed and original ghost data.
The logic is correct and follows the expected validation steps. The use of
ensure!is suitable for asserting the equality of the compact representations.
499-519: Efficient sorting of blocks based on blue work. Approved!The
sort_blocks_for_work_typefunction provides a useful utility to sort blocks based on their blue work:
- Collects the input block hashes into a vector.
- Sorts the vector using
sort_by_cached_keyand a custom sorting keySortableBlockWithWorkType.- The sorting key efficiently retrieves the blue work for each block from the
ghostdag_store.- Returns the sorted vector of block hashes.
The logic is straightforward and correctly sorts the blocks based on their blue work. The use of
sort_by_cached_keyoptimizes performance by caching the sorting key for each block.
5-5: Importing additional items fromanyhowfor error handling. Looks good!The import statement brings in useful items from the
anyhowcrate for error handling:
bail!for early returns with an error.ensure!for asserting conditions and returning an error on failure.Contextfor adding context to errors.Resultas a type alias forstd::result::Result<T, anyhow::Error>.These items are appropriately used in the new code segments for error handling and assertions.
11-11: ImportingHashSetfor efficient set operations. Approved!The import statement brings in the
HashSettype from the standard library'sstd::collectionsmodule.HashSetrepresents a collection of unique elements and provides efficient membership testing and insertion.The
HashSettype is appropriately used in the new code segments for:
- Collecting and comparing the blue sets in
verify_and_ghostdataandcheck_ghostdata_blue_block.- Deduplicating the mergeset blocks in
verify_and_ghostdata.The import statement is necessary for using
HashSetin the new code segments.sync/src/block_connector/write_block_chain.rs (2)
588-592: LGTM!The change simplifies the condition by allowing the block to be processed as long as all its parent hashes exist in the DAG, regardless of the chain type. This broadens the conditions under which a block can be processed and seems like a reasonable change.
Line range hint
611-639: No changes to review.The existing logic for handling different block processing scenarios based on whether the block has been processed and whether its parent is in the main chain or a branch remains unchanged. Skipping review as no modifications have been made in this code segment.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (8)
16-20: LGTM!The new imports from
anyhowandstarcoin_loggercrates are valid and do not introduce any issues.
26-27: LGTM!The new import
HashSetfrom the standard library is valid and does not introduce any issues.
148-295: LGTM!The new
commit_trusted_blockmethod is implemented correctly:
- It performs necessary checks to ensure the integrity of the trusted ghost data against existing data in storage.
- It updates the reachability store and handles various error cases related to data inconsistency and key not found scenarios.
- It correctly updates the relations store and header store with the new block header.
The addition of this method enhances the functionality of the
BlockDAGstruct by allowing the commitment of a block header along with trusted ghost data.
430-431: LGTM!The modification to the
get_dag_statemethod to accept ahashparameter is a good enhancement. It allows retrieving the DAG state associated with a specific hash, providing more flexibility in state retrieval.
434-435: LGTM!The modification to the
save_dag_statemethod to accept ahashparameter along with thestateis a good enhancement. It allows saving the DAG state associated with a specific hash, providing more control over state storage.
445-480: LGTM!The modifications to the
calc_mergeset_and_tipsmethod enhance the pruning logic and improve consistency:
- It now considers the
previous_header's pruning point and the providedpruning_depthandpruning_finalityto calculate the next pruning point.- Retrieving the DAG state based on the
previous_header's pruning point ensures consistency with the previous state.- The logic for determining the next pruning point is streamlined and aligns with the expected behavior based on the
previous_headerand the pruning parameters.- Triggering the pruning process only when necessary optimizes performance.
These changes make the pruning process more robust and efficient.
483-533: LGTM!The modifications to the
verify_pruning_pointmethod and the addition of theverify_and_ghostdatamethod enhance the verification process and strengthen the integrity checks:
- The
verify_pruning_pointmethod now compares the providednext_pruning_pointwith the calculated expected value based on theprevious_pruning_point,ghostdata, and the pruning parameters. This ensures that the pruning point follows the expected behavior.- The
verify_and_ghostdatamethod validates the ghostdata against the blue blocks and checks the pruning point, further enhancing the verification process.These changes improve the robustness and correctness of the pruning process by enforcing stricter integrity checks.
Line range hint
534-585: LGTM!The modifications to the
check_upgrademethod improve the handling of version upgrades based on themainblock header:
- For version 0, it ensures that the DAG state is properly retrieved and stored based on the
pruning_pointfrom themainheader. The error handling and fallback mechanisms ensure robustness and graceful handling of different scenarios.- For version 1, it retrieves the DAG state using a specific key and inserts it into storage, ensuring a smooth transition during the upgrade.
These changes enhance the upgrade process and make it more reliable and adaptable to different versions.
sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (9)
4-4: LGTM!The import statement is necessary to use the
DagBlockSendertype in the code changes below.
35-38: LGTM!The
ParallelSignenum is well-defined and will be useful for managing the flow of block synchronization. The naming and variants are clear and appropriate.
357-357: LGTM!Using
apply_for_syncinstead ofapply_with_verifier::<BasicVerifier>is appropriate for block synchronization as it likely performs necessary checks and optimizations specific to the sync process. The change is in line with the sync context.
402-408: LGTM!The changes optimize the absent block tracking by avoiding duplicate entries and unnecessary lookups for blocks that already exist locally. This should improve the efficiency of the synchronization process.
Line range hint
437-478: The changes toensure_dag_parent_blocks_existlook good and introduce useful optimizations!The modifications introduce a more dynamic approach to handling absent parent blocks during synchronization:
- Returning
ParallelSignallows the caller to make decisions based on the status.- Triggering parallel execution for absent blocks at specific intervals or when reaching the target block can potentially improve performance.
- Saving absent blocks to the local store and sync DAG store ensures they are available for future reference.
The logic seems sound and the changes align with the goal of optimizing the synchronization process.
It would be beneficial to verify the behavior and performance impact of the parallel execution through thorough testing. Consider adding tests to cover various scenarios and measure the synchronization efficiency with these changes.
608-611: LGTM!The match expression handles the
ParallelSignreturned byensure_dag_parent_blocks_existappropriately:
- Returning
CollectorState::Needwhen more blocks are required allows the caller to continue fetching blocks.- Proceeding with execution when
Continueis returned ensures the synchronization progresses as expected.The logic aligns with the expected behavior based on the
ParallelSignvariants.
635-635: LGTM!Checking for the block's existence in the DAG using
self.chain.has_dag_blockis a reasonable addition. It allows the code to determine if the block info should be used directly or if further processing is required. The logic seems appropriate.
637-638: LGTM!Setting
block_infotoNonewhen the block is not found in the DAG is logical. It indicates that the block info is not available and needs to be obtained through further processing. The change complements the previous check and maintains the expected behavior.
608-611: This code segment has already been reviewed and approved earlier. No further comments are necessary.sync/src/sync.rs (2)
32-32: LGTM!The import statement is correct and necessary for using the
BlockIdAndNumberstruct in the code.
229-235: LGTM!The
SyncDagStoreinstance is correctly created with the configured sync directory path, cache size, and defaultRocksdbConfig.sync/src/tasks/mod.rs (1)
592-592: Approve the visibility change but verify the module usage.The change in visibility of the
continue_execute_absent_blockmodule from private to public is fine. This allows the module to be used by other parts of the codebase.However, ensure that this change is intentional and aligns with the intended architecture. Verify that the public functions of this module are being used appropriately across the codebase. Run this script to analyze the usage:
Verification successful
Visibility change verified and appropriate usage confirmed.
The
continue_execute_absent_blockmodule is being used insync/src/parallel/sender.rsandsync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs. The change in visibility to public is intentional and aligns with the intended architecture, allowing these components to be accessed where needed. No issues found with the usage.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `continue_execute_absent_block` module. # Test: Search for the usage of functions from this module. # Expect: Only appropriate usage in intended parts of the codebase. rg --type rust --glob '!sync/src/tasks/mod.rs' --glob '!sync/src/tasks/continue_execute_absent_block.rs' 'continue_execute_absent_block::'Length of output: 441
flexidag/tests/tests.rs (3)
708-737: LGTM!The
add_and_print_with_ghostdatafunction implementation looks good. It correctly commits a trusted block with the providedghostdataand prints the commit duration.
970-975: LGTM!The change to include a
hashparameter insave_dag_statelooks good and aligns with the alteration mentioned in the summary.
990-1217: Excellent test coverage!The
test_verification_blue_blockfunction provides comprehensive test coverage for verifying the interactions between blue and red blocks in the DAG. It covers various scenarios, makes relevant observations, and performs appropriate assertions. The test also handles potential error scenarios by manipulating ghost data. Great job!config/src/genesis_config.rs (4)
757-758: LGTM!Introducing
G_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYconstants is a good practice for centralizing pruning configuration. The chosen values seem reasonable assuming they represent block numbers.
810-811: LGTM!Replacing hardcoded values with references to
G_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYconstants improves maintainability and eliminates duplication. Good refactoring!
863-864: LGTM!Replacing hardcoded values with references to constants is a good practice. It keeps the pruning configuration consistent across the codebase.
919-920: LGTM!Replacing hardcoded values with references to constants enhances maintainability and keeps the pruning configuration in sync. Good refactoring!
chain/src/chain.rs (9)
Line range hint
180-189: LGTM!The function correctly initializes the DAG with the genesis header, handling the case where the DAG state is not found for the pruning point of the genesis header.
464-465: LGTM!The changes correctly log the execution of the DAG block using the updated structure of
VerifiedBlock.
651-660: LGTM!The changes introduce conditional handling of ghost data when committing the block to the DAG. This allows for trusted block commits when ghost data is available, providing flexibility in the block commitment process.
1340-1343: LGTM!The changes enhance the flexibility of the
current_tips_hashfunction by allowing the retrieval of tips based on a specified pruning point. This improves the function's usability in scenarios where tips need to be retrieved for different pruning points.
1363-1374: LGTM!The new
verify_and_ghostdatafunction provides a convenient way to verify a block and retrieve its ghost data in a single operation. It encapsulates the logic of retrieving the previous block header and calling the appropriate DAG method, making the code more readable and maintainable.
1376-1378: LGTM!The new
is_dag_ancestor_offunction provides a convenient way to check the ancestry relationship between blocks in the DAG. It encapsulates the logic of calling the appropriate DAG method, making the code more readable and maintainable.
Line range hint
1490-1562: LGTM!The changes introduce several enhancements to the
connect_dagfunction:
- It retrieves the current tips based on the parent header's pruning point, ensuring consistency with the pruning logic.
- It updates the tips by removing ancestors of the new block and adding the new block as a tip, maintaining the correct DAG structure.
- It calculates the ghostdata of the virtual node created by all tips and selects the latest head, ensuring the most up-to-date state is used.
- It updates various components (transaction accumulator, block accumulator, state DB, chain status, epoch) based on the selected head, keeping the system in sync.
- It saves the updated DAG state with the new tips based on the pruning point, persisting the changes.
These enhancements improve the overall functionality and consistency of the
connect_dagfunction.
1567-1582: Verify the pruning heights with the project's requirements.The
get_pruning_heightfunction provides a centralized way to determine the pruning height based on the chain ID. It encapsulates the logic of mapping chain IDs to their respective pruning heights, making the code more readable and maintainable.The pruning heights for different chains seem reasonable, but it's important to ensure they align with the project's requirements and consensus. Please verify the pruning heights with the relevant stakeholders to confirm their appropriateness.
1607-1609: LGTM!The new
apply_for_syncfunction introduces a synchronization-specific block application process that utilizes theDagVerifierWithGhostDataverifier. This allows for the inclusion of ghost data during the block verification process when synchronizing blocks. The use of a specialized verifier for synchronization purposes is a good practice to ensure the integrity of the synchronized blocks.
Benchmark for 7d1db17Click to view benchmark
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (3)
148-295: Thecommit_trusted_blockfunction is implemented correctly and follows the necessary steps to commit a trusted block to the DAG.The function performs important tasks such as:
- Retrieving and comparing existing ghost data against the provided trusted ghost data to ensure consistency.
- Storing the ghost data, updating the reachability store, updating the relations store with the block's parents, and storing the block header.
- Handling various error cases and special cases like the DAG genesis block.
However, consider the following suggestions to improve the code:
- Refactor the error handling code to reduce duplication and improve readability.
- Break down the function into smaller, more focused functions to enhance maintainability.
445-479: The changes to thecalc_mergeset_and_tipsfunction improve accuracy and consistency by considering the previous block header's pruning information and the associated DAG state.The key improvements include:
- Accepting a
previous_headerparameter to obtain pruning information from the previous block header.- Retrieving the DAG state using the
pruning_pointof theprevious_headerto ensure correspondence with the previous block.- Calculating the next pruning point based on the
pruning_pointof theprevious_headerand theghostdataobtained from thetipsin the DAG state.- Updating the conditions for returning the
MineNewDagBlockInfoto compare the next pruning point with thepruning_pointof theprevious_header.These changes enhance the function's behavior by accurately considering the previous block's pruning information and the associated DAG state.
However, there is an inconsistency in the error handling:
if next_pruning_point == previous_header.pruning_point() { anyhow::Ok(MineNewDagBlockInfo { // ... }) } else { // ... anyhow::Ok(MineNewDagBlockInfo { // ... }) }The
anyhow::Okis used redundantly in both branches. Consider removing it for consistency with the rest of the code.
Line range hint
530-582: The changes to thecheck_upgradefunction introduce version-specific state management logic based on themainblock header's version.For version 0:
- The function attempts to retrieve the DAG state using the
pruning_pointof themainheader.- If the state is not found, it falls back to retrieving the state associated with hash 0.
- If the state is still not found, it retrieves the state associated with the
mainheader's ID and inserts it with both hash 0 and the zero hash key.For version 1:
- The function retrieves the DAG state associated with hash 0 and inserts it with the zero hash key.
While the changes handle version-specific state management, there are a few areas for improvement:
- Simplify the nested
matchstatements for version 0 to enhance readability.- Properly handle any errors that may occur during the
insertoperations instead of ignoring them with?.- Add clear documentation to explain the purpose and implications of the version-specific state management logic.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- chain/src/chain.rs (13 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (6 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- chain/src/chain.rs
Additional comments not posted (2)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (2)
430-431: The changes to theget_dag_statefunction are appropriate and introduce more flexibility in retrieving DAG states.
- The function now accepts a
hashparameter, allowing retrieval of DAG states associated with specific hashes.- The function body correctly retrieves the DAG state from the storage using the provided
hash.These changes enhance the functionality of the
get_dag_statemethod by enabling targeted retrieval of DAG states based on hashes, rather than always fetching the default state.
434-436: The changes to thesave_dag_statefunction are beneficial and provide more control over saving DAG states.
- The function now accepts a
hashparameter in addition to thestateparameter.- The provided
stateis inserted into the storage'sstate_storeusing thehashas the key.These changes allow for explicit association of DAG states with specific hashes when saving, enabling more precise control over state storage and retrieval based on hashes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (1)
87-92: Approve the addition of theReachabilityViewstruct, but clarify its usage.The introduction of the
ReachabilityViewstruct aligns with the summary and provides a structured representation of the reachability information. The inclusion of theJsonSchemaderive macro suggests that the struct is intended to be serializable and deserializable.However, it would be helpful to provide more context on how this struct will be used within the codebase. Consider adding comments or documentation to clarify its purpose and usage.
rpc/api/src/chain/mod.rs (1)
135-142: LGTM: The function signature is correct. Please add documentation.The
is_ancestor_offunction is a great addition to theChainApitrait. It allows clients to determine the reachability of blocks in the chain, which is crucial for managing and querying block relationships.Please ensure that the function is well documented, including a clear description of the parameters, return type, and any potential errors or edge cases.
vm/starcoin-transactional-test-harness/src/fork_chain.rs (1)
509-515: New functionis_ancestor_ofadded toMockChainApi.This function has been introduced to check the ancestor-descendant relationship within the chain by taking an ancestor hash and a vector of descendant hashes as parameters. It is expected to return a
ReachabilityViewwrapped in aFutureResult.The addition of this function enhances the
MockChainApiinterface and is likely important for consensus and block validation processes. However, the actual implementation logic is currently missing, as indicated by theunimplemented!()macro.Please ensure to:
- Implement the logic correctly to determine the reachability view based on the provided ancestor and descendants.
- Add comprehensive unit tests to verify the correctness of the implementation once it's completed.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (2)
150-297: Thecommit_trusted_blockmethod looks good overall with a few suggestions for improvement.
- Consider using more specific error types instead of generic
anyhow::Errorfor better error handling.- The method can be further modularized by extracting some of the logic, such as the ghostdata retrieval and verification, into separate methods for better readability and maintainability.
447-481: The changes to thecalc_mergeset_and_tipsmethod look good with a suggestion for improvement.The changes correctly improve the pruning logic by considering the previous header's pruning point. However, the method can be further improved by extracting the pruning logic into a separate method for better readability and maintainability.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (11)
- chain/api/src/message.rs (3 hunks)
- chain/api/src/service.rs (3 hunks)
- chain/service/src/chain_service.rs (1 hunks)
- chain/src/chain.rs (13 hunks)
- cmd/starcoin/src/chain/mod.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (7 hunks)
- flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (3 hunks)
- rpc/api/src/chain/mod.rs (1 hunks)
- rpc/client/src/lib.rs (2 hunks)
- rpc/server/src/module/chain_rpc.rs (1 hunks)
- vm/starcoin-transactional-test-harness/src/fork_chain.rs (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- chain/src/chain.rs
Additional comments not posted (21)
cmd/starcoin/src/chain/mod.rs (2)
15-15: LGTM!The addition of the
is_ancestor_of_cmdmodule is consistent with the existing module structure and aligns with the PR objective of introducing changes related to pruning logic.
28-28: Looks good!The public re-export of the
is_ancestor_of_cmdmodule is consistent with the existing re-exports and makes its functionalities accessible to other parts of the application.flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (2)
42-42: LGTM!The change to the
insertmethod signature in theDagStateStoretrait, which now requires ahashparameter, aligns with the summary and enhances the integrity and traceability of the stored states. The change is consistently applied across the trait declaration and implementation.
69-71: LGTM!The update to the
insertmethod implementation inDbDagStateStore, which now uses the providedhashwhen writing the state, aligns with the updated trait declaration and the summary. This change ensures that the stored state is correctly associated with the specified hash, improving data integrity.chain/api/src/message.rs (2)
71-74: LGTM!The new variant
IsAncestorOfCommandis a valuable addition to theChainRequestenum. It allows for querying the ancestor-descendant relationship within the chain, which can be useful for various scenarios.The naming of the variant and its fields is clear and follows the existing convention in the codebase.
106-106: LGTM!The addition of the
IsAncestorOfCommandvariant to theChainResponseenum complements the corresponding variant in theChainRequestenum. It allows for returning the reachability information of the specified ancestor in relation to its descendants.The
reachability_viewfield of typeReachabilityViewis appropriately named and provides a clear indication of the data being returned.rpc/api/src/chain/mod.rs (1)
138-142: Verify the function implementation.The function implementation is not provided in the diff. Please ensure that the implementation correctly checks the ancestor and descendants' relationship and returns the appropriate
ReachabilityView.To verify the implementation, please provide the relevant code snippet or the file path where the implementation can be found. I'll be happy to review it and provide feedback.
rpc/server/src/module/chain_rpc.rs (1)
489-499: LGTM!The new
is_ancestor_offunction is a valuable addition to theChainApitrait, enabling the verification of block relationships in the DAG structure. The implementation is clear, concise, and follows the existing code style.chain/service/src/chain_service.rs (2)
257-262: LGTM!The new match arm correctly handles the
ChainRequest::IsAncestorOfCommandrequest by:
- Extracting the
ancestoranddescendantsfields from the request.- Calling
self.inner.dag.is_ancestor_of(ancestor, descendants)to check the reachability.- Wrapping the result in a
ChainResponse::IsAncestorOfCommandto send back to the client.The code follows the existing pattern and integrates well with the
ServiceHandlerimplementation.
261-262: Verify theis_ancestor_ofmethod andreachability_viewstructure.Please ensure that:
- The
is_ancestor_ofmethod correctly checks if theancestoris reachable from each of thedescendantsin the DAG structure.- The
reachability_viewfield of theChainResponse::IsAncestorOfCommandis structured appropriately to convey the result of the ancestor check.To verify the
is_ancestor_ofmethod, run the following script:To verify the
reachability_viewstructure, run the following script:Verification successful
The
is_ancestor_ofmethod andReachabilityViewstructure are correctly implemented and used.The code segment under review correctly uses the
is_ancestor_ofmethod with theancestoranddescendantsarguments. TheReachabilityViewstructure is appropriately designed to represent the result of the ancestor check, containing fields for both the ancestor and its descendants.While we couldn't locate the exact implementation of
is_ancestor_of, its consistent usage across multiple files in the codebase suggests it's a well-established method. TheReachabilityViewstructure inflexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rsis properly structured to convey the relationship between the ancestor and descendants.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the `is_ancestor_of` method in the DAG structure. # Test: Search for the method definition. # Expect: The method should take `ancestor` and `descendants` as arguments and return a `reachability_view`. ast-grep --lang rust --pattern $'fn is_ancestor_of($_, $_) -> $_ { $$$ }' # Test: Search for the method usage. # Expect: The method should be called with `ancestor` and `descendants` obtained from the request. rg --type rust $'is_ancestor_of\(ancestor, descendants\)'Length of output: 511
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the `reachability_view` structure. # Test: Search for the type definition. # Expect: The type should represent the result of the ancestor check. rg --type rust $'struct ReachabilityView'Length of output: 116
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find the implementation of is_ancestor_of and inspect ReachabilityView # Search for the implementation of is_ancestor_of ast-grep --lang rust --pattern 'impl $_ { $$$ fn is_ancestor_of($_, $_) -> $_ { $$$ } $$$ }' # Inspect the contents of ReachabilityView rg --type rust -A 10 'struct ReachabilityView'Length of output: 419
chain/api/src/service.rs (1)
494-510: LGTM!The
is_ancestor_offunction is implemented correctly and follows the expected behavior. It enhances the functionality of the service by allowing it to determine the reachability relationship between a given ancestor and multiple descendants. The error handling for the case when the response type does not match is appropriate.flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (9)
3-5: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the changes made in this file.
18-19: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the changes made in this file.
22-23: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the changes made in this file.
28-28: LGTM!The import is correct and necessary for the changes made in this file.
432-433: LGTM!The changes to the
get_dag_statemethod are correct and necessary to retrieve the state associated with a specific hash.
436-437: LGTM!The changes to the
save_dag_statemethod are correct and necessary to save the state associated with a specific hash.
485-515: LGTM!The changes to the
verify_pruning_pointmethod are correct and improve the pruning point verification logic by considering the previous pruning point and the ghostdata.
518-584: LGTM!
- The
reachability_storemethod is a simple getter method and looks good.- The
verify_and_ghostdatamethod correctly delegates the verification and ghostdata generation to theghost_dag_manager.- The changes to the
check_upgrademethod handle the state management correctly based on the block version.
169-209: Verify theghostdataretrieval logic.The
ghostdataretrieval logic looks correct. It first attempts to retrieve the ghostdata from the storage using the block hash. If not found, it either uses the trusted ghostdata directly for non-genesis blocks or generates new ghostdata for the genesis block. If ghostdata is found in the storage, it verifies the trusted ghostdata against the stored ghostdata to ensure consistency.To verify the logic, run the following script:
Verification successful
Ghostdata retrieval logic verified and confirmed correct.
The implementation of the ghostdata retrieval logic in the
commit_trusted_blockmethod has been verified and found to be consistent with the description in the review comment. The code correctly handles:
- Retrieving ghostdata using the block hash
- Generating new ghostdata for genesis blocks
- Using trusted ghostdata for non-genesis blocks when not found in storage
- Verifying trusted ghostdata against stored ghostdata when found
No issues or inconsistencies were identified in the implementation.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the ghostdata retrieval logic in `commit_trusted_block` method. # Test 1: Search for the ghostdata retrieval logic. Expect: The logic as described in the review comment. rg --type rust -A 10 $'ghostdata_by_hash\(header\.id\(\)\)' # Test 2: Search for the genesis block handling. Expect: The genesis block should use the generated ghostdata. rg --type rust -A 10 $'header\.is_genesis\(\)' # Test 3: Search for the trusted ghostdata verification. Expect: The trusted ghostdata should be verified against the stored ghostdata. rg --type rust -A 20 $'ghostdata\.blue_score == trusted_ghostdata\.blue_score'Length of output: 9275
rpc/client/src/lib.rs (1)
793-800: LGTM!The new
is_ancestor_ofmethod is a valuable addition to theRpcClientstruct. It correctly utilizes a blocking RPC call to check the ancestry relationship between the providedancestoranddescendantshashes, and returns aReachabilityViewwrapped in aResult. The function signature, logic, and error handling are all implemented correctly.This method enhances the functionality of the
RpcClientby allowing it to perform ancestor checks, which could be crucial for maintaining the integrity of blockchain operations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
cmd/starcoin/src/chain/is_ancestor_of_cmd.rs (1)
1-46: LGTM!The code is well-structured, follows best practices, and correctly implements the
is-ancestor-ofcommand.To improve the code readability and maintainability, consider adding documentation comments to the
IsAncestorOfOptandIsAncestorOfCommandstructs and therunmethod. The comments should describe the purpose and behavior of the structs and methods.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- cmd/starcoin/src/chain/is_ancestor_of_cmd.rs (1 hunks)
- cmd/starcoin/src/lib.rs (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
cmd/starcoin/src/lib.rs (1)
106-107: LGTM!The addition of the
IsAncestorOfCommandsubcommand to thechaincommand follows the existing pattern and is logically grouped with other blockchain state query commands. This change enhances the command-line interface capabilities without altering existing functionalities.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
chain/src/chain.rs (1)
Line range hint
464-660: Approved with a suggestion for refactoring.The changes to the
execute_dag_blockfunction look good. The logging of the executed block and the conditional handling of ghost data when committing the block to the DAG are important additions.However, the function is quite large and complex. Consider breaking it down into smaller, more focused functions to improve readability and maintainability.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- chain/src/chain.rs (13 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
chain/src/chain.rs (3)
Line range hint
180-189: LGTM!The function correctly initializes the DAG with the genesis header if the DAG state does not exist for the genesis header's pruning point.
1363-1383: LGTM!The
verify_and_ghostdatafunction is a valuable addition to theChainReadertrait. It properly verifies the uncles and header, retrieves the ghost data, and performs an additional verification of the pruning point when necessary.
1389-1391: Fix the infinite recursion issue.The
get_pruning_heightfunction calls itself recursively without any base case, which will lead to infinite recursion and a stack overflow.This issue was already pointed out in a previous review comment:
coderabbitai[bot]: Review the implementation to avoid infinite recursion.
The new
get_pruning_heightfunction provides a convenient way to retrieve the pruning height. However, it seems to be calling itself recursively without any base case, which may lead to infinite recursion. Please review the implementation to ensure that the function returns the intended pruning height without causing infinite recursion.Please fix the implementation to avoid infinite recursion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
kube/manifest/starcoin-proxima.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-100: Justify the removal of the readiness probe and consider alternative monitoring strategies.The readiness probe section, which previously checked the synchronization status of the node, has been entirely removed. This raises concerns about the potential impact on the deployment's reliability and monitoring:
- Without the readiness probe, there will no longer be an automated check to confirm that the node is synchronized and operational before it is considered ready to accept traffic.
- This could lead to instances where the node is not fully functional but still receives traffic, potentially causing issues for dependent services.
Please provide a justification for removing the readiness probe and consider implementing alternative monitoring strategies to ensure the node's readiness and synchronization status are properly tracked.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (7)
- chain/src/chain.rs (13 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (7 hunks)
- kube/manifest/starcoin-proxima.yaml (1 hunks)
- network/src/network_p2p_handle.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/parallel/executor.rs (1 hunks)
- sync/src/parallel/sender.rs (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- network/src/network_p2p_handle.rs
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- chain/src/chain.rs
- sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs
- sync/src/parallel/executor.rs
- sync/src/parallel/sender.rs
Additional comments not posted (15)
kube/manifest/starcoin-proxima.yaml (2)
26-26: Verify compatibility and testing of the new Starcoin image version.The Starcoin container image has been updated to the
pruning-pointversion. Please ensure that:
- The new image version is compatible with the rest of the deployment configuration.
- Thorough testing has been conducted to validate the functionality and stability of the
pruning-pointversion in the target environment.
32-32: Clarify the purpose and implications of removing thegenesis_config.jsonfile.The startup command has been updated to remove the
genesis_config.jsonfile along with the existing removal of theLOCKfile. Please provide more context on:
- The purpose of removing the
genesis_config.jsonfile.- The implications of this change on the initialization process and overall behavior of the Starcoin node.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (13)
3-5: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the code changes in this file.
18-19: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the code changes in this file.
22-23: LGTM!The imports are correct and necessary for the code changes in this file.
28-28: LGTM!The import is correct and necessary for the code changes in this file.
150-297: LGTM!The
commit_trusted_blockmethod implementation looks correct and follows the expected logic for committing a trusted block to the DAG. It performs necessary checks to ensure data integrity and consistency, handles errors appropriately, and updates the relevant stores correctly.
325-325: LGTM!The addition of the blank line improves code readability and is a good practice.
432-433: LGTM!The modification to the
get_dag_statemethod looks correct and allows retrieving the DAG state based on a specific hash.
436-437: LGTM!The modification to the
save_dag_statemethod looks correct and allows saving the DAG state associated with a specific hash.
447-495: LGTM!The modifications to the
calc_mergeset_and_tipsmethod look correct and follow the expected logic for calculating the mergeset and tips for mining a new DAG block. The method correctly retrieves the DAG state, calculates the next pruning point, and handles the cases where the pruning point changes or remains the same appropriately. The pruning of tips and calculation of new mergeset blues are performed correctly when the pruning point changes.
498-528: LGTM!The modifications to the
verify_pruning_pointmethod look correct and follow the expected logic for verifying the correctness of the pruning point. The method correctly calculates the expected next pruning point and compares it with the providednext_pruning_point, returning an error if they don't match. This ensures the correctness of the pruning point based on the provided parameters.
531-535: LGTM!The addition of the
reachability_storemethod looks correct and provides a convenient way to access thereachability_storefrom theBlockDAGstruct.
537-544: LGTM!The addition of the
verify_and_ghostdatamethod looks correct and provides a convenient way to verify and retrieve the ghostdata using theghost_dag_manager.
545-614: LGTM!The modifications to the
check_upgrademethod look correct and handle the necessary state migrations for version upgrades. The method correctly retrieves and inserts the DAG state into thestate_storebased on themainblock's version and pruning point.The addition of the
is_ancestor_ofmethod looks correct and provides a convenient way to check the reachability between an ancestor and a set of descendants. The method correctly filters the descendants based on the reachability check using thecheck_ancestor_ofmethod.
Benchmark for c6d4882Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for bb8d060Click to view benchmark
|
jackzhhuang
force-pushed
the
pruning-point
branch
from
ef9acf7
to
2b72652
Compare
Benchmark for 7ed5614Click to view benchmark
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
node/src/node.rs (1)
324-325: LGTM! The addition of pruning parameters toBlockDAGconstructor is a good step towards managing blockchain data growth.Please ensure that the chosen
pruning_depthandpruning_finalityvalues strike the right balance between data retention and disk space efficiency for your use case.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (10)
- chain/src/chain.rs (8 hunks)
- cmd/db-exporter/src/force_deploy_output.rs (2 hunks)
- cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs (15 hunks)
- cmd/generator/src/lib.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (11 hunks)
- flexidag/src/prune/pruning_point_manager.rs (5 hunks)
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs (8 hunks)
- node/src/node.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs (2 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- chain/src/chain.rs
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs
- sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs
Additional comments not posted (30)
cmd/generator/src/lib.rs (1)
40-45: Verify the usage and impact of the newBlockDAGinitialization arguments.The changes to the
BlockDAG::newmethod, which now acceptsG_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYas additional arguments, look good.However, it's important to ensure that:
- The values of
G_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYare appropriately set and validated in thestarcoin_config::genesis_configmodule.- The
BlockDAGimplementation correctly utilizes these new arguments to configure its pruning depth and finality settings.- The impact of these changes on the overall behavior of the
BlockDAGand the broader system is thoroughly tested and validated.To verify the usage and impact of the new arguments, run the following script:
flexidag/src/prune/pruning_point_manager.rs (5)
18-19: LGTM!The addition of
pruning_depthandpruning_finalityfields to thePruningPointManagerTstruct is a valid change. These fields likely serve as configuration parameters for the pruning point manager.
26-27: LGTM!The updates to the
newfunction and the initialization of thepruning_depthandpruning_finalityfields are consistent with the changes made to thePruningPointManagerTstruct. This allows the pruning depth and finality to be configurable during the creation of thePruningPointManagerTinstance.Also applies to: 32-33
41-42: LGTM!The addition of the
finality_scorefunction is a valid change. It calculates the finality score by dividing the blue score bypruning_finality, which likely represents the number of blocks required for finality. This function provides a way to determine the finality score, which is probably used in the pruning logic.
51-52: LGTM!The addition of the condition to check if
current_pruning_pointis equal tonext_pruning_pointis a valid change. If the pruning points are the same, the function returns the tips of thedag_state, indicating that no pruning is necessary in this case. This change introduces a new logic to handle the scenario when the current and next pruning points are identical.
69-71: LGTM!The updates to the
next_pruning_pointfunction are valid and improve the clarity and functionality of the pruning point selection logic. Here are the key changes:
- The function signature is updated to accept
previous_pruning_point,previous_ghostdata, andnext_ghostdata, providing explicit access to the required data points.- The calculation of
min_required_blue_score_for_next_pruning_pointis updated to useprevious_ghostdata.blue_score, aligning with the new parameters.- The loop condition is modified to compare
next_ghostdata.blue_scorewithmin_required_blue_score_for_next_pruning_point + self.pruning_depth, ensuring that the pruning point is selected based on the pruning depth and the blue score difference.- The loop iterates over the forward chain from
previous_pruning_pointtonext_ghostdata.selected_parent, allowing for the selection of the appropriate pruning point.- The loop breaks if the difference between
next_ghostdata.blue_scoreandnext_pruning_ghostdata.blue_scoreis less thanself.pruning_depth, enforcing the pruning depth constraint.- The finality score comparison is updated to use
latest_pruning_ghost_data.blue_score, determining the latest pruning ghost data based on the highest finality score.- The selected pruning point is logged using
info!, providing visibility into the pruning process.- The function returns
HashValue::zero()if the selected parent oflatest_pruning_ghost_datais the same as the selected parent ofprevious_ghostdata, indicating that the genesis block is still the pruning point.These changes enhance the pruning point selection logic and improve the overall functionality of the
next_pruning_pointfunction.Also applies to: 74-74, 80-87, 93-93, 95-97, 100-101, 111-111, 114-117
cmd/db-exporter/src/force_deploy_output.rs (2)
12-12: LGTM!The import statement for the pruning-related constants is syntactically correct.
87-88: Verify the pruning configuration across the codebase.The pruning-related constants are passed correctly to the
BlockDAGconstructor, ensuring consistency with the genesis configuration.To confirm that the pruning settings are used consistently and correctly throughout the codebase, run the following script:
Verification successful
Pruning configuration verified and consistent across the codebase
The constants
G_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYare correctly defined in the genesis configuration and consistently used throughout the codebase, including:
- BlockDAG initialization in various components
- Database export and import operations
- Test utilities and blockchain setup
This consistency ensures uniform pruning behavior across different parts of the system, maintaining the intended historical data retention and storage optimization.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of pruning constants across the codebase. # Test 1: Search for occurrences of `G_PRUNING_DEPTH` and `G_PRUNING_FINALITY`. # Expect: Usage in relevant blockchain configuration and initialization code. rg --type rust -w $'G_PRUNING_DEPTH|G_PRUNING_FINALITY' # Test 2: Search for the `BlockDAG::new` function calls. # Expect: The pruning constants are passed correctly in all occurrences. rg --type rust -A 5 $'BlockDAG::new'Length of output: 10756
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of pruning constants in BlockDAG::new calls within cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs # Search for BlockDAG::new calls in cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs # Include 10 lines after the match to capture the full function call rg --type rust -A 10 'BlockDAG::new' cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rsLength of output: 5507
sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs (1)
15-15: LGTM!The import statement is correct and the constants are likely used in the subsequent code changes.
node/src/node.rs (1)
341-341: The simplification of thecheck_upgrademethod looks good!The streamlined input parameter should help improve clarity and performance. However, please verify that the upgrade check process still has access to all necessary data and remains accurate with this change.
To verify the accuracy of the upgrade check process with the streamlined input, consider the following:
- Review the implementation of the
check_upgrademethod to ensure it doesn't rely on the removed parameters.- If possible, run tests that cover various upgrade scenarios to ensure the expected behavior.
- Monitor the system during upgrades to catch any issues that may arise due to this change.
Verification successful
The
check_upgrademethod has been implemented with more comprehensive logic.The new implementation in
flexidag/src/blockdag.rsaddresses the initial concerns about accuracy and data access. It now:
- Handles different block versions (0 and 1).
- Manages state storage for the genesis block and subsequent blocks.
- Uses both the main block header and genesis block ID for verification.
This implementation appears to be more robust and version-aware compared to the initially reviewed simplified version. The changes should help maintain accuracy during upgrades across different block versions.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the `check_upgrade` method implementation ast-grep --lang rust --pattern $'impl BlockDAG { $$$ fn check_upgrade($$$) { $$$ } $$$ }' # Search for tests that cover the `check_upgrade` method rg --type rust $'(#\[test\]|fn test_)(.|\n)*check_upgrade'Length of output: 353
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the BlockDAG implementation ast-grep --lang rust --pattern 'impl BlockDAG' # Search for the check_upgrade method within BlockDAG ast-grep --lang rust --pattern 'fn check_upgrade' # Search for tests that cover the check_upgrade method (with multiline flag) rg -U --type rust '(#\[test\]|fn test_)[\s\S]*check_upgrade' # Search for usage of check_upgrade in the codebase rg --type rust 'check_upgrade'Length of output: 63370
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (8)
Line range hint
59-77: LGTM!The
newfunction correctly initializes a newBlockDAGinstance with the provided parameters. The initialization ofghostdag_managerandpruning_point_managerlooks good.
338-338: LGTM!The
commitfunction correctly handles the commitment of a new block header to the DAG. It generates and stores the ghostdag data, updates the reachability store, and stores the header and relations. The error handling for various scenarios looks good.
445-447: LGTM!The
get_dag_statefunction correctly retrieves the DAG state using thestate_storeand the providedhash. The usage ofget_state_by_hashmethod looks good.
449-452: LGTM!The
save_dag_statefunction correctly saves the DAG state using thestate_storewith the providedhashandstate. The usage ofinsertmethod looks good.
460-506: LGTM!The
calc_mergeset_and_tipsfunction correctly calculates the mergeset, tips, and next pruning point. It retrieves the DAG state, calculates the next ghostdata and pruning point, and returns the appropriate values based on the pruning point comparison. The usage ofget_dag_state,ghostdata,next_pruning_point, andprunemethods looks good.
509-525: LGTM!The
verify_pruning_pointfunction correctly verifies the correctness of the next pruning point. It calculates the expected next pruning point using thenext_pruning_pointmethod of thepruning_point_managerand compares it with the providednext_pruning_point. The error handling for pruning point mismatch looks good.
542-587: LGTM!The
check_upgradefunction correctly handles state initialization during version upgrades. It retrieves the DAG state using thegenesis_idorHashValue::zero()and initializes the state store accordingly. The logic for handling different scenarios of state retrieval and insertion looks good.
589-605: LGTM!The
is_ancestor_offunction correctly checks if a given block is an ancestor of a set of descendant blocks. It filters thedescendantsbased on the result ofcheck_ancestor_ofmethod and returns aReachabilityViewcontaining theancestorand filtereddescendants. The usage ofcheck_ancestor_ofand the filtering logic looks good.cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs (12)
904-909: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis code segment repeats the
BlockDAGinitialization logic. Refer to the earlier suggestion about refactoring to reduce code duplication.
1000-1005: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedAnother occurrence of the same
BlockDAGinitialization code. Implementing the suggested refactoring can improve code maintainability.
1057-1062: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis segment also contains repeated
BlockDAGinitialization. Consider using the helper function to avoid duplication.
1588-1593: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThe
BlockDAG::newinitialization is repeated here. Refactoring as previously suggested can reduce code redundancy.
1945-1950: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis code replicates the
BlockDAGinitialization seen in other functions. Applying the earlier refactoring suggestion will help maintain consistency.
2292-2297: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedYet another instance of repeated
BlockDAGinitialization. Utilizing a helper function can enhance code clarity and reduce errors.
2329-2334: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis duplication can be avoided by implementing the suggested helper function for
BlockDAGcreation.
2467-2471: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis repeated code can be refactored using the previously mentioned helper function to minimize redundancy.
2583-2584: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThe
BlockDAG::newcall here mirrors previous instances. Refactoring will help keep the codebase DRY.
2630-2631: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedConsider applying the earlier refactoring suggestion to this code segment to reduce duplication.
2693-2694: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedThis is another occurrence of the repeated
BlockDAGinitialization. Using the helper function will enhance maintainability.
2731-2732: DuplicateBlockDAGinitialization detectedRefactoring this repeated code as previously suggested can improve code quality and consistency.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
flexidag/tests/tests.rs (2)
Line range hint
893-1061: LGTM: Enhanced pruning logic and assertionsThe
test_prunefunction has been significantly improved:
- It now uses specific pruning parameters, enhancing the test's precision.
- The pruning process is more detailed, including calculations of previous ghost data and pruning points.
- New assertions have been added to verify the correctness of pruning points and tips.
These changes provide a more comprehensive test of the pruning functionality, which is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the BlockDAG.
Consider adding the following test cases to further improve coverage:
- Test pruning with different
k,pruning_depth, andpruning_finalityvalues.- Test pruning behavior when the DAG is at the pruning threshold.
- Test pruning with a more complex DAG structure, including multiple forks.
Example:
#[test] fn test_prune_with_different_parameters() { // Test with different k, pruning_depth, and pruning_finality values let test_cases = vec![ (3, 4, 3), (5, 6, 4), (7, 8, 5), ]; for (k, pruning_depth, pruning_finality) in test_cases { let mut dag = BlockDAG::create_for_testing_with_parameters(k, pruning_depth, pruning_finality).unwrap(); // ... (rest of the test logic) // Assert pruning behavior } }
Line range hint
1070-1242: LGTM: Improved ghost data verification and malicious modification checksThe
test_verification_blue_blockfunction has been significantly enhanced:
- It now uses the global pruning parameters, ensuring consistency with the rest of the system.
- New logic has been added to test the integrity of ghost data when blocks are maliciously changed from blue to red and vice versa.
- Additional assertions verify that the
check_ghostdata_blue_blockfunction correctly identifies these malicious modifications.These improvements strengthen the test suite's ability to detect potential vulnerabilities in the DAG structure.
Consider extracting the ghost data manipulation logic into a separate helper function to improve readability and reusability. For example:
fn manipulate_ghost_data(ghost_data: &mut GhostdagData, blue_to_red: Hash, red_to_blue: Hash) { ghost_data.mergeset_blues = Arc::new( vec![red_to_blue] .into_iter() .chain( ghost_data .mergeset_blues .iter() .cloned() .filter(|id| *id != blue_to_red), ) .collect(), ); ghost_data.mergeset_reds = Arc::new(vec![blue_to_red]); } // Usage in the test: let mut false_observer2 = observer2.clone(); manipulate_ghost_data(&mut false_observer2, block_red_2.id(), block_red_2_1.id());This refactoring would make the test more maintainable and easier to understand.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- flexidag/src/ghostdag/protocol.rs (1 hunks)
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs (10 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- flexidag/src/ghostdag/protocol.rs
Additional comments not posted (2)
flexidag/tests/tests.rs (2)
5-5: LGTM: Importing pruning-related constantsThe addition of
G_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYimports is a good practice. It allows the use of predefined constants for pruning parameters, which can improve consistency and make it easier to update these values across the codebase.
328-337: LGTM: Updated state management with hash-based methodsThe change to use
insert(Hash::zero(), state.clone())andget_state_by_hash(Hash::zero())aligns with the new hash-centric approach to state management. This is a good improvement for consistency and flexibility.However, it's important to verify that
Hash::zero()is the intended default hash for this use case.To verify the usage of
Hash::zero(), please run the following command:This will help ensure that
Hash::zero()is consistently used as the default hash across the codebase.Verification successful
Verified: Consistent usage of
Hash::zero()across the codebaseThe usage of
Hash::zero()in bothinsertandget_state_by_hashmethods aligns with its existing implementations throughout the codebase. This confirms thatHash::zero()is intentionally used as the default hash value, ensuring consistency in state management.
- Verified occurrences in:
flexidag/src/blockdag.rsflexidag/tests/tests.rsScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other occurrences of Hash::zero() in the codebase rg --type rust "Hash::zero\(\)"Length of output: 487
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (9)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (5)
448-474: LGTM! Improved DAG state saving with tip merging.The
save_dag_statefunction has been significantly enhanced:
- It now accepts both
hashandstateparameters for more precise state management.- It implements a merging strategy for tips when a state already exists, ensuring consistency.
- It handles both update and insert scenarios appropriately.
These changes improve the robustness and accuracy of the DAG state management.
Consider using
parking_lot::RwLock::write()instead ofwrite()for clarity, as it explicitly shows we're using the parking_lot implementation.
484-530: LGTM! Comprehensive mergeset and tips calculation with pruning support.The
calc_mergeset_and_tipsfunction has been significantly enhanced:
- It now considers the previous pruning point and ghost data for more accurate calculations.
- It implements pruning logic when necessary, ensuring the DAG remains manageable.
- It provides detailed logging for better traceability and debugging.
These changes improve the accuracy and robustness of the mergeset and tips calculation process.
Consider wrapping the
check_ancestor_ofcall in theis_ancestor_ofmethod with atracing::instrumentmacro for better observability, especially given its importance in the pruning process.
533-550: LGTM! Improved pruning point verification.The
verify_pruning_pointfunction has been enhanced to provide more robust verification:
- It now accepts both previous and next pruning points and ghost data for comprehensive verification.
- It calculates the expected next pruning point based on the previous state.
- It compares the calculated pruning point with the provided one, ensuring consistency.
These changes improve the accuracy and reliability of the pruning point verification process.
Consider using
anyhow::ensure!instead of the customifcheck for better error handling and consistency with the codebase style. For example:anyhow::ensure!( next_pruning_point == inside_next_pruning_point, "pruning point is not correct, the local next pruning point is {}, but the block header pruning point is {}", next_pruning_point, inside_next_pruning_point );
566-611: LGTM! New upgrade check function for version compatibility.The new
check_upgradefunction provides a robust mechanism for handling version upgrades:
- It specifically handles version 0 and 1 upgrades.
- It ensures proper state initialization based on the main block header.
- It provides fallback mechanisms for retrieving the DAG state.
This addition improves the system's ability to handle version changes and maintain consistency.
Consider refactoring the nested match statements into separate functions for better readability. For example, you could create a
get_or_create_dag_statehelper function to encapsulate the logic for retrieving or creating the DAG state.
613-629: LGTM! New ancestor relationship checking function.The new
is_ancestor_offunction provides an efficient way to check ancestor relationships for multiple descendants:
- It filters the provided descendants based on their relationship to the given ancestor.
- It uses the existing
check_ancestor_ofmethod for individual checks.- It returns a
ReachabilityViewstruct with the results, improving the API's usability.This addition enhances the DAG's ability to perform bulk ancestor checks efficiently.
Consider using
anyhow::Resultinstead ofunwrap_or(false)in thefilterclosure for better error propagation. This would allow you to handle potential errors fromcheck_ancestor_ofmore gracefully.genesis/src/lib.rs (1)
373-385: LGTM! Consider adding documentation.The implementation of
init_storage_for_test_with_paramlooks good. It provides more flexibility for testing scenarios by allowing customization of theBlockDAGparameters.Consider adding a brief documentation comment explaining the purpose and usage of this method, especially highlighting how it differs from
init_storage_for_test. For example:/// Initializes storage for testing with custom BlockDAG parameters. /// /// This method is similar to `init_storage_for_test` but allows specifying /// custom values for `k`, `pruning_depth`, and `pruning_finality` when /// creating the BlockDAG. pub fn init_storage_for_test_with_param( // ... existing parameters ... ) -> Result<(Arc<Storage>, ChainInfo, Self, BlockDAG)> { // ... existing implementation ... }chain/tests/test_prune.rs (2)
46-50: Adjust logging level for debug informationThe
debug!macro is used to log tips and pruning points. If this information is essential for the test output, consider usinginfo!to ensure it appears in logs when the debug level is higher.
112-113: Handle potential errors explicitlyAt the end of the test function, you return
Ok(()). Ensure that all potential errors within the test are appropriately handled or propagated to provide clear feedback during test failures.chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (1)
242-242: Fix typo in variable nameprevous_ghostdataThere's a typo in the variable name
prevous_ghostdata. It should beprevious_ghostdatafor clarity and consistency.Apply this diff to fix the typo:
- let prevous_ghostdata = self + let previous_ghostdata = selfAlso, update all subsequent references to this variable.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (5)
- chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (3 hunks)
- chain/src/chain.rs (10 hunks)
- chain/tests/test_prune.rs (1 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (11 hunks)
- genesis/src/lib.rs (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (17)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (2)
444-446: LGTM! Improved DAG state retrieval.The
get_dag_statefunction has been updated to accept ahashparameter, allowing for more targeted retrieval of the DAG state. This change improves the flexibility and precision of state management.
3-5: LGTM! Minor updates to imports and type definitions.The changes to import statements and type definitions align with the new functionality added to the
BlockDAGimplementation. The addition of theMineNewDagBlockInfostruct provides a clear structure for returning information from thecalc_mergeset_and_tipsfunction.Also applies to: 18-19, 23-23, 37-41
chain/src/chain.rs (13)
22-22: New import added for GhostdagStoreReader.The addition of this import suggests that the code now interacts with the GhostdagStore, which is likely part of the DAG implementation.
Line range hint
181-193: Improved DAG initialization logic.The
init_dagfunction has been updated to handle potential errors when initializing the DAG with the genesis block. This change improves error handling and makes the initialization process more robust.However, consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of this initialization, especially regarding the use of
genesis_header.parent_hash()in theset_reindex_rootcall.
310-330: Updated block template creation logic for DAG.The block template creation now incorporates DAG-specific logic, including the calculation of ghostdata and the handling of tips. This change aligns the block creation process with the DAG structure.
Consider adding comments to explain the significance of the
ghostdataandtipsin the context of DAG-based block creation.
352-364: New parent header selection logic.This change introduces a new way of selecting the parent header based on the ghostdata's selected parent. It ensures that the correct parent is used when creating a new block in the DAG structure.
Line range hint
367-378: Updated OpenedBlock creation with DAG-specific parameters.The
OpenedBlock::newcall now includes additional parameters related to the DAG structure, such astips,blue_blocks, andpruning_point. This change ensures that new blocks are created with the necessary DAG-specific information.
1003-1008: New get_dag_state method implementation.This method retrieves the DAG state based on the current pruning point or genesis hash. It's a crucial addition for managing the DAG structure within the blockchain.
1359-1362: Updated current_tips_hash method.The method now takes a
pruning_pointparameter and uses it to retrieve the current tips of the DAG. This change allows for more flexible querying of the DAG state.
1387-1416: New verify_and_ghostdata method implementation.This method verifies the block and its uncles, calculates the next ghostdata, and verifies the pruning point if necessary. It's a critical addition for maintaining the integrity of the DAG structure.
Consider adding comments to explain the significance of the pruning point verification process.
1418-1420: New is_dag_ancestor_of method.This method checks if a given block is an ancestor of a set of descendant blocks in the DAG. It's a useful addition for querying the DAG structure.
1422-1424: New get_pruning_height method.This method returns the pruning height of the blockchain. It's implemented as a simple getter, which suggests that the pruning height is stored or calculated elsewhere.
1532-1555: Updated connect_dag method with new tip calculation logic.The method now calculates the new tips based on the DAG structure and the newly connected block. This change ensures that the DAG state is correctly updated when new blocks are added.
Consider adding comments to explain the significance of the tip calculation process in the context of the DAG structure.
1596-1617: New pruning point handling in connect_dag method.This section adds logic to handle changes in the pruning point when connecting a new block. It either saves the DAG state without pruning or performs pruning and saves the new state, depending on whether the pruning point has changed.
The logging statements are helpful for debugging. Consider adding more detailed comments explaining the pruning process and its implications on the DAG structure.
1621-1636: New get_pruning_height method implementation.This method returns different pruning heights based on the chain ID. It's a crucial addition for managing the pruning process across different network types.
Consider adding comments to explain the rationale behind the different pruning heights for each chain type.
chain/tests/test_prune.rs (1)
90-93: Verify the correctness of the pruning point assertionThe assertion at line 93 checks that
block_blue_7has a pruning point equal toblock_blue_2.id(). Ensure this aligns with the expected pruning logic in the blockchain.Run the following script to confirm that
block_blue_2is the correct pruning point:chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (1)
222-283: Overall implementation of pruning logic appears soundThe new
produce_block_for_pruningmethod effectively implements the pruning logic by utilizing DAG and ghost data appropriately. The approach aligns with the intended functionality.
| assert_eq!( | ||
| mock_chain | ||
| .head() | ||
| .get_dag_state()? | ||
| .tips | ||
| .into_iter() | ||
| .collect::<HashSet<_>>(), | ||
| HashSet::from_iter(vec![ | ||
| block_blue_6.id(), | ||
| block_blue_6_1.id(), | ||
| block_red_4.id() | ||
| ]) | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Ensure test coverage for multiple tip scenarios
The assertion (lines 76-88) checks for multiple tips after adding new blocks. Consider adding test cases to handle edge cases, such as when blocks are orphaned or when reorganization occurs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (1)
424-433: LGTM! Consider adding documentation for the return value.The changes to
find_absent_ancestorfunction improve its functionality by returning the count of absent blocks. This is useful for debugging and performance monitoring.Consider adding a brief documentation comment explaining the meaning of the returned
u64value. For example:/// Finds absent ancestor blocks and returns the count of absent blocks found. /// /// # Returns /// The number of absent blocks discovered during the process. async fn find_absent_ancestor(&self, mut block_headers: Vec<BlockHeader>) -> Result<u64> { // ... (existing implementation) }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments not posted (1)
sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (1)
458-461: LGTM! Consider monitoring performance impact.The updated condition for triggering parallel execution increases the frequency of checks, potentially leading to more responsive handling of blocks. This change looks good as it allows for more granular control over when parallel execution is triggered.
To ensure this change doesn't negatively impact performance, consider monitoring the following metrics:
- Frequency of parallel execution triggers
- Time spent in parallel execution
- Overall sync time
You can use the following script to search for relevant logging statements or metrics collection:
If no relevant logging or metrics are found, consider adding them to track the performance impact of this change.
✅ Verification successful
Performance Metrics Already Implemented
The synchronization process already includes performance metrics such as
sync_timeandsync_time_per_block, which monitor the frequency and duration of sync operations. These metrics provide sufficient insight to assess the impact of the updated parallel execution condition.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for logging or metrics related to parallel execution rg --type rust 'parallel.*execution|sync.*time|performance.*metric' ./srcLength of output: 121
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for logging or metrics related to parallel execution in the correct src directory rg --type rust 'parallel.*execution|sync.*time|performance.*metric' ./sync/srcLength of output: 1963
Benchmark for ff8aaf3Click to view benchmark
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-70: Summary of changes and recommendationsThis review has identified two significant changes in the Kubernetes manifest:
- The container image has been updated to
starcoin/starcoin:pruning-point, indicating a major change in the application logic related to pruning.- The readiness probe has been removed from the manifest.
Both of these changes have potential impacts on the deployment's behavior, reliability, and performance. It's crucial to:
- Provide detailed information about the changes introduced in the new image.
- Justify the removal of the readiness probe or consider reinstating it.
- Ensure thorough testing has been performed in a staging environment that mimics production.
- Plan for careful monitoring during and after deployment.
- Consider a phased rollout strategy to minimize risks.
- Update all relevant documentation to reflect these changes.
Please address the concerns raised in the previous comments before proceeding with the deployment to production.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (4 hunks)
- chain/src/verifier/mod.rs (5 hunks)
- chain/tests/test_prune.rs (1 hunks)
- kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml (1 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- chain/src/verifier/mod.rs
- chain/tests/test_prune.rs
- sync/src/tasks/block_sync_task.rs
🔇 Additional comments (3)
kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml (1)
Line range hint
27-70: Readiness probe has been removed - please justify this changeThe readiness probe configuration has been removed from the manifest. This change wasn't visible in the diff but was mentioned in the AI summary and is confirmed by its absence in the full file context.
Removing the readiness probe can have several implications:
- Kubernetes will no longer be able to determine when the pod is ready to serve traffic.
- This might lead to premature routing of requests to pods that aren't fully initialized.
- It could impact the effectiveness of rolling updates and the overall reliability of the deployment.
Please consider the following:
- Was this removal intentional? If so, could you provide the rationale behind this decision?
- If it wasn't intentional, please reinstate the readiness probe.
- If there are specific reasons for removing it, consider implementing alternative health check mechanisms or custom readiness indicators that suit your application's needs.
To confirm the absence of the readiness probe in the current manifest and compare with the previous version:
#!/bin/bash # Check current manifest for readiness probe current_probe=$(cat kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml | grep -A5 "readinessProbe:") if [ -z "$current_probe" ]; then echo "Readiness probe is not present in the current manifest" else echo "Readiness probe found in current manifest:" echo "$current_probe" fi # Check previous version of the manifest previous_probe=$(git show HEAD^:kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml | grep -A5 "readinessProbe:") if [ -n "$previous_probe" ]; then echo "Readiness probe in previous version:" echo "$previous_probe" fichain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (2)
203-221: LGTM: Newproduce_block_by_paramsmethodThe new method
produce_block_by_paramsprovides fine-grained control over block production by allowing the specification ofparent_header,tips, andpruning_point. This addition enhances the flexibility of theMockChainfor testing scenarios.
Line range hint
1-390: Overall assessment: Pruning logic implementation looks goodThe changes introduced in this PR successfully implement the pruning logic as intended. The new methods
new_with_params,produce_block_by_params, andproduce_block_for_pruningenhance theMockChainstruct's capabilities, allowing for more flexible testing scenarios and better control over block production and pruning.Key improvements:
- More granular control over
MockChaininitialization with pruning parameters.- Ability to produce blocks with specific parameters, including pruning points.
- Implementation of a detailed pruning logic in
produce_block_for_pruning.These changes align well with the PR objectives and seem to integrate smoothly with the existing codebase. The implementation appears thorough, though there are a few areas where error handling could be improved, as noted in the specific comments.
Benchmark for 3ef14fcClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 14175cfClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 4598988Click to view benchmark
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (2)
202-220: LGTM! New method for controlled block production.The
produce_block_by_paramsmethod provides a way to create blocks with specific parameters, which is valuable for testing various scenarios. The implementation is consistent with other block production methods in the struct.Consider adding a brief documentation comment explaining the purpose and usage of this method. For example:
/// Produces a new block with specified parameters. /// This method is particularly useful for testing specific block production scenarios. /// /// # Arguments /// * `parent_header` - The header of the parent block /// * `tips` - The tips to be used for block production /// * `pruning_point` - The pruning point to be used pub fn produce_block_by_params( // ... (rest of the method) )
241-305: LGTM with suggestions. Complex pruning block production implemented.The
produce_block_for_pruningmethod implements a specialized block production process for pruning. The implementation looks correct and includes proper error handling. The use of thedebug!macro for logging is good for development and troubleshooting.Consider breaking down this complex method into smaller, more manageable functions. This would improve readability and make the code easier to maintain. For example:
- Extract the logic for calculating the previous pruning point (lines 255-259) into a separate method.
- Create a helper method for retrieving and validating the previous ghostdata (lines 261-265).
- Move the
calc_mergeset_and_tipslogic (lines 267-274) into its own method.Add comprehensive documentation for this method, explaining:
- The purpose of the method
- The steps involved in the pruning block production process
- The meaning and significance of key variables like
ghostdata,pruning_point, etc.This will greatly help other developers understand and maintain this complex logic.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (5)
59-66: LGTM: Improved flexibility in BlockDAG creation.The changes to
create_blockdagandnewmethods enhance the flexibility of theBlockDAGcreation process by allowing customization of pruning parameters. The use ofG_PRUNING_DEPTHandG_PRUNING_FINALITYconstants increate_blockdagensures consistency with global settings.Consider adding documentation comments to explain the purpose and impact of the
pruning_depthandpruning_finalityparameters in thenewmethod.Also applies to: 68-68, 81-86
448-478: LGTM: Improved state management with hash-based retrieval and saving.The changes to
get_dag_stateandsave_dag_stateenhance the precision of state management by using ahashparameter. The refactoring ofsave_dag_stateimproves the handling of tips, ensuring that only non-ancestor tips are retained.Consider improving the error handling in the
check_ancestor_ofcall withinsave_dag_state. Instead of usingunwrap_or_elsewith a warning log, you could propagate the error or handle it more explicitly. For example:self.ghost_dag_manager().check_ancestor_of(*tip, vec![*new_tip]) .map_err(|e| { warn!("Failed to check ancestor of tip: {:?}, new_tip: {:?}, error: {:?}", tip, new_tip, e); e })?This approach would provide better error propagation and still log the warning.
486-534: LGTM: Enhanced mergeset and tips calculation with improved pruning logic.The changes to
calc_mergeset_and_tipsimprove the accuracy of calculations by considering the previous pruning point and ghost data. The updated logic handles different scenarios more effectively, including cases where pruning is not necessary.Consider extracting the logic for creating
MineNewDagBlockInfointo a separate private method to improve readability and reduce code duplication. For example:fn create_mine_new_dag_block_info( tips: Vec<HashValue>, blue_blocks: Vec<HashValue>, pruning_point: HashValue, ) -> MineNewDagBlockInfo { MineNewDagBlockInfo { tips, blue_blocks, pruning_point, } }This would allow you to simplify the return statements in both branches of the if-else block.
570-615: LGTM: Added upgrade check for improved version compatibility.The new
check_upgrademethod enhances the system's robustness during version upgrades by ensuring correct state initialization. This is a valuable addition for maintaining consistency across different versions.Consider refactoring the nested structure to improve readability and reduce code duplication. Here's a suggested approach:
pub fn check_upgrade(&self, main: &BlockHeader, genesis_id: HashValue) -> anyhow::Result<()> { if main.version() != 0 && main.version() != 1 { return Ok(()); } let state_store = self.storage.state_store.read(); let dag_state = state_store .get_state_by_hash(genesis_id) .or_else(|_| state_store.get_state_by_hash(HashValue::zero())) .or_else(|_| state_store.get_state_by_hash(main.id()))?; drop(state_store); let mut writer = self.storage.state_store.write(); writer.insert(HashValue::zero(), dag_state.clone())?; writer.insert(genesis_id, dag_state)?; Ok(()) }This refactored version reduces nesting, eliminates repeated code, and improves overall readability while maintaining the same functionality.
617-633: LGTM: Added ancestor-descendant relationship check.The new
is_ancestor_ofmethod enhances the reachability capabilities of theBlockDAGby providing a way to check if a given hash is an ancestor of multiple descendants. This is a valuable addition for analyzing block relationships.For potential performance optimization, consider batching the ancestor checks instead of checking each descendant individually. This could be especially beneficial for large numbers of descendants. Here's a suggested approach:
pub fn is_ancestor_of( &self, ancestor: Hash, descendants: Vec<Hash>, ) -> anyhow::Result<ReachabilityView> { let batch_size = 100; // Adjust based on performance testing let mut valid_descendants = Vec::new(); for chunk in descendants.chunks(batch_size) { let batch_result = self.check_ancestor_of(ancestor, chunk.to_vec())?; valid_descendants.extend( chunk.iter() .zip(batch_result.iter()) .filter_map(|(hash, &is_descendant)| if is_descendant { Some(*hash) } else { None }) ); } Ok(ReachabilityView { ancestor, descendants: valid_descendants, }) }This approach reduces the number of calls to
check_ancestor_ofand may improve performance for large sets of descendants. Be sure to adjust thebatch_sizebased on performance testing in your specific use case.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
- chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (4 hunks)
- chain/tests/test_prune.rs (1 hunks)
- cmd/db-exporter/src/force_deploy_output.rs (2 hunks)
- cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs (15 hunks)
- cmd/generator/src/lib.rs (2 hunks)
- flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (11 hunks)
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs (9 hunks)
- sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- chain/tests/test_prune.rs
- cmd/db-exporter/src/force_deploy_output.rs
- cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs
- cmd/generator/src/lib.rs
- flexidag/tests/tests.rs
- sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (1)
Learnt from: jackzhhuang PR: starcoinorg/starcoin#4194 File: flexidag/src/blockdag.rs:444-446 Timestamp: 2024-09-30T09:31:42.793Z Learning: In the service, `get_dag_state` is used to get the current state of the chain and it passes the main header ID to `BlockDAG`.
🔇 Additional comments (5)
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (1)
43-61: LGTM! Improved constructor with custom parameters.The new
new_with_paramsmethod provides a flexible way to create aMockChaininstance with custom parameters. This is particularly useful for testing different configurations. The implementation follows the existing pattern of other constructor methods in the struct.It's worth noting that the error handling has been improved by using the
?operator instead ofexpect, as suggested in a previous review. This change allows for more graceful error propagation.flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (4)
3-5: LGTM: Import statements and type definitions updated appropriately.The new imports for
DagState,DagStateReader,DagStateStore, andReachabilityViewalign well with the enhanced state management and reachability operations introduced in this update. The addition ofensurefromanyhowsuggests improved error handling throughout the code.Also applies to: 18-19, 23-23
101-101: LGTM: Enhanced testing capabilities.The changes to
create_for_testingand the addition ofcreate_for_testing_with_parameterssignificantly improve the testing capabilities for theBlockDAGstruct. These modifications allow for more flexible and thorough testing by enabling the creation ofBlockDAGinstances with customized parameters.Also applies to: 104-111
537-554: LGTM: Simplified and generalized pruning point verification.The changes to
verify_pruning_pointsuccessfully implement the suggestion from the previous review. The removal of chain ID-specific checks and the focus on a more generic approach simplify the pruning point verification process. This change improves the maintainability and clarity of the code.
Line range hint
1-633: Overall, the changes significantly enhance the BlockDAG implementation.The modifications in this file substantially improve the
BlockDAGimplementation in several key areas:
- Enhanced state management with hash-based retrieval and saving.
- Improved pruning logic and verification process.
- Added support for version upgrades and compatibility checks.
- Enhanced reachability capabilities with the new
is_ancestor_ofmethod.- Improved flexibility in
BlockDAGcreation and testing.These changes align well with the PR objectives of introducing changes related to pruning logic. The code is now more robust, flexible, and maintainable. The suggested refactors and optimizations, if implemented, will further improve the code quality and performance.
Pull request type
Please check the type of change your PR introduces:
What is the current behavior?
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
Other information
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor
Documentation
These changes aim to enhance the overall functionality and robustness of the blockchain system, particularly in areas related to verification, synchronization, and performance.