Store states in the DB before their blocks #712
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Partial fix for #692
|
To test the effectiveness of this change I'm going to try syncing a node where I drop 50% of the block storing ops... it should work, but it'll be slower. |
|
My test didn't end up producing many conclusive results. I ended up making it so that when storing the block the node would panic with probability 0.001, and this seemed to allow a few recoveries (start, sync, die, repeat) until it got stuck. I think this is still an improvement over the current state of things (I didn't see any |
paulhauner
approved these changes
Dec 12, 2019
paulhauner
added
ready-to-merge
and removed
ready-for-review
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue Addressed
#692
Proposed Changes
We've been seeing a few issues with database inconsistency on the testnet, so this is a quick patch to hopefully address those issues. I'd like to address the issue more thoroughly once our choice of DB has settled down (or we come up with an API to abstract over atomic transactions in different DBs).