Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Pruning logic #4194

Merged
merged 65 commits into from
Oct 8, 2024
Merged

Pruning logic #4194

merged 65 commits into from
Oct 8, 2024

Conversation

jackzhhuang
Copy link
Collaborator

@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang commented Sep 13, 2024

Pull request type

Please check the type of change your PR introduces:

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update (formatting, renaming)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
  • Build related changes
  • Documentation content changes
  • Other (please describe):

What is the current behavior?

Issue Number: N/A

What is the new behavior?

Other information

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • New Features

    • Enhanced block verification and chain management with support for ghost data.
    • Introduced methods for checking ancestor-descendant relationships within the chain, improving query capabilities.
    • Added a method for retrieving the current pruning height, enhancing data management.
    • Improved handling of DAG structures and pruning processes.
    • Updated method for retrieving current tips to allow for more flexible hash computation based on pruning points.
    • New methods for initializing mock chains and producing blocks tailored for pruning scenarios.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Enhanced error handling in block selection and synchronization logic.
  • Refactor

    • Streamlined synchronization processes by simplifying control flow.
    • Updated the initialization method for BlockDAG instances to improve clarity and consistency.
  • Documentation

    • Updated comments and method signatures for clarity and maintainability.

These changes aim to enhance the overall functionality and robustness of the blockchain system, particularly in areas related to verification, synchronization, and performance.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 13, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes involve substantial updates to the blockchain system, primarily enhancing the ChainReader trait and its associated functionalities. New methods have been introduced to manage block relationships and pruning points effectively. The current_tips_hash method has been modified to accommodate a pruning point parameter, while additional methods like is_dag_ancestor_of, get_pruning_height, and verify_and_ghostdata have been added to improve state management and verification processes throughout the codebase.

Changes

Files Change Summary
chain/api/src/chain.rs, chain/src/chain.rs Enhanced ChainReader trait with new methods for managing block relationships and pruning. Updated current_tips_hash to include a pruning point parameter. Introduced is_dag_ancestor_of and get_pruning_height methods.
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs Added new methods to MockChain for flexible initialization and block production tailored for pruning scenarios.
chain/tests/test_prune.rs Introduced a comprehensive test suite for blockchain pruning functionality, validating the blockchain state at various stages.
cmd/db-exporter/src/force_deploy_output.rs, cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs, cmd/generator/src/lib.rs, sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs Updated BlockDAG initialization to use create_blockdag instead of DEFAULT_GHOSTDAG_K, changing how BlockDAG instances are constructed.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs Enhanced state management and pruning logic in BlockDAG, including modifications to the commit, get_dag_state, and verify_pruning_point methods. Introduced new methods for managing state and ancestry checks.
flexidag/tests/tests.rs Adjusted tests to align with new state management practices, incorporating hash parameters for state retrieval.

Possibly related PRs

  • Update the block header to ensure compatibility with future updates #4175: The changes in this PR involve significant modifications to the BlockHeader structure, including the addition of new fields like version and pruning_point, which are relevant to the enhancements made in the ChainReader trait in the main PR that also deals with pruning and block management.
  • Fix status command #4186: This PR modifies the SyncStatus and SyncStatusView types, which are related to the overall management of blockchain state and synchronization, aligning with the changes in the main PR that enhance the functionality of blockchain data management.

Poem

🐇 In the blockchain's vast, winding maze,
New paths emerge, with bright, shiny ways.
Ancestors checked, pruning points clear,
With ghost data’s dance, we have nothing to fear.
So hop along, let the blocks align,
In this wondrous chain, all will be fine! 🌟


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 3

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
sync/src/lib.rs (1)

13-13: New parallel module added. Please provide more context.

The addition of the parallel module 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 parallel module, 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 parallel module. 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 85564ab and d012172.

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 executor and sender. The access modifiers are correctly specified, with executor being private and sender being public. The changes look good!

flexidag/src/types/ordering.rs (4)

38-42: LGTM!

The struct is correctly defined with the required fields hash and blue_work.


44-48: LGTM!

The constructor method is correctly implemented for instantiating SortableBlockWithWorkType.


50-54: LGTM!

The PartialEq trait implementation is correct and consistent with the PartialEq implementation for SortableBlock.


56-60: LGTM!

The PartialOrd trait implementation is correct and consistent with the PartialOrd implementation for SortableBlock.

sync/src/block_connector/mod.rs (2)

6-6: LGTM!

The import statement for the Version type is correct and necessary for using it in the MinerRequest struct.


51-53: Looks good!

The addition of the version field to the MinerRequest struct 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 insert method signature in the DagStateStore trait, which now takes a hash parameter in addition to the state, is a good improvement. This explicit association of states with hashes enhances the integrity and traceability of stored data.


69-69: LGTM!

The insert method implementation in DbDagStateStore has been correctly updated to use the provided hash parameter 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 hash parameter to the write method of dag_state_access is the correct way to propagate the hash value to the underlying storage layer. This change maintains consistency with the updated insert method 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_point equals next_pruning_point is 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 PartialEq and Eq traits to the derive macro for GhostdagData is 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 PartialEq and Eq traits to the derive macro for CompactGhostdagData is 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_CF is valid and does not introduce any issues.


67-67: LGTM!

The addition of REACHABILITY_DATA_CF to 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 db to SyncAbsentBlockStore::new is a valid change. It ensures that SyncAbsentBlockStore has 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 ghostdata field to the VerifiedBlock struct is a meaningful enhancement that allows for the storage of ghost data alongside the block. The use of Option type 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 the verify_and_ghostdata method.

The addition of the verify_and_ghostdata method to the ChainReader trait 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:

  1. How does the verify_and_ghostdata method fit into the overall block verification flow? Is it called before or after other verification steps?
  2. What is the significance of the uncles parameter in the verification process? How are the uncles' block headers utilized?
  3. How does the returned GhostdagData impact 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_of method to the ChainReader trait 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 the apply method.

The addition of the apply_for_sync method to the ChainWriter trait 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 apply method, please provide answers to the following questions:

  1. What specific synchronization scenario does the apply_for_sync method cater to? How does it differ from the regular block application flow handled by the apply method?
  2. Are there any differences in the verification, execution, or connection steps performed by apply_for_sync compared to apply?
  3. Are there any considerations or constraints that determine when to use apply_for_sync instead of apply?

Clarifying these aspects will help maintain a clear understanding of the block application process and the role of the apply_for_sync method within it.


109-109: Verify the usage of the pruning_point parameter.

The modification to the current_tips_hash method to accept the pruning_point parameter 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_point parameter is properly provided when calling the current_tips_hash method throughout the codebase. Run the following script to verify its usage:

Verification successful

The pruning_point parameter is properly used in the current_tips_hash method calls.

The verification confirms that the pruning_point parameter is consistently provided in the current_tips_hash method 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_collector variable using the BlockCollector::new_with_handle method aligns with the refactoring efforts mentioned in the AI-generated summary. The removal of the mut keyword indicates that the variable is not intended to be mutable after initialization, which is a reasonable design choice.

The block_collector seems 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 the current_tips_hash method change across the codebase.

The change to pass the pruning point to current_tips_hash method 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_hash is used. You can use the following script to verify:

Verification successful

The change to the current_tips_hash method 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 version parameter to MinerRequest is a valid way to pass the block header version to the create_block_template function. The change is consistent with the AI-generated summary.


192-192: Verify the usage of the pruning_point field.

The addition of the pruning_point field to MinerResponse is a valid change that aligns with the overall theme of introducing pruning logic. However, please verify how the pruning_point is 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_point field is used correctly and extensively in the codebase.

The pruning_point field 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 DagBlockExecutor struct and its new method are implemented correctly. The struct contains the necessary fields for parallel block execution, and the new method properly initializes the struct with the provided dependencies and sets up the communication channels.


55-65: LGTM!

The waiting_for_parents method is implemented correctly. It efficiently checks the availability of parent blocks in the BlockDAG by iterating over the parent hashes and using the has_dag_block method. The method returns the expected boolean value based on the presence of all parent blocks.


67-210: LGTM!

The start_to_execute method is implemented correctly and follows the expected flow for parallel block execution. It properly spawns a new task using tokio::spawn to handle block execution concurrently.

The method correctly waits for the parent blocks to be available using the waiting_for_parents method before proceeding with the execution. It creates or forks the BlockChain instance based on the block's parent hash, ensuring the correct chain state is used for execution.

The usage of the DagVerifierWithGhostData verifier during the apply_with_verifier method 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_execute method 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 starcoin crates, such as starcoin_chain, starcoin_chain_api, starcoin_config, starcoin_crypto, starcoin_dag, starcoin_executor, starcoin_logger, starcoin_storage, and starcoin_types. These dependencies provide the necessary functionality for the DagBlockExecutor to perform parallel block execution.

The usage of anyhow for error handling and propagation is suitable, as it allows for convenient error management and provides meaningful error messages.

The file leverages tokio for asynchronous programming and concurrency, which is appropriate for the parallel block execution process. The usage of tokio::spawn and asynchronous channels enables efficient concurrent execution of blocks.

The inclusion of starcoin_logger for 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 of init_with_params is intended.

The visibility of init_with_params has been changed from pub(super) to pub, 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_uncles method signature and allow the ghost data to be associated with the verified block.


Line range hint 109-171: LGTM!

The changes to the verify_uncles method allow it to return ghost data related to the uncles, and handle the case when there are no uncles by returning None.


326-340: LGTM!

The changes to the verify_block and verify_uncles methods of NoneVerifier are 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_uncles implementations are consistent with the updated method signature.

sync/src/block_connector/block_connector_service.rs (6)

17-17: LGTM!

The addition of the use statement for starcoin_chain::BlockChain is correct and necessary for using the BlockChain type 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_else improves 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, and vm_metrics from the service context is correct and necessary for creating a new BlockChain instance.


420-427: LGTM!

The creation of a new BlockChain instance 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 of check_upgrade method call looks good, but verify the method and its callers have been updated.

The change simplifies the check_upgrade method 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_upgrade method in the BlockDAG struct 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_upgrade method and its caller have been updated correctly.

The check_upgrade method in flexidag/src/blockdag.rs now accepts a single BlockHeader parameter, which aligns with the change in node/src/node.rs where chain_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_ghostdata function implements a thorough verification process for the given blue blocks and associated ghost data:

  1. Initializes new block data with the selected parent.
  2. Topologically sorts the mergeset blocks.
  3. Checks each blue candidate for k-cluster violations and colors them appropriately.
  4. Verifies the consistency of the blue set data.
  5. 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_block function performs a robust validation of the blue blocks against the provided ghost data:

  1. Reconstructs the ghost data by processing the blue candidates.
  2. Verifies the consistency of the blue set between the reconstructed and original ghost data.
  3. Calculates the blue score and blue work for the reconstructed ghost data.
  4. 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_type function provides a useful utility to sort blocks based on their blue work:

  1. Collects the input block hashes into a vector.
  2. Sorts the vector using sort_by_cached_key and a custom sorting key SortableBlockWithWorkType.
  3. The sorting key efficiently retrieves the blue work for each block from the ghostdag_store.
  4. 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_key optimizes performance by caching the sorting key for each block.


5-5: Importing additional items from anyhow for error handling. Looks good!

The import statement brings in useful items from the anyhow crate for error handling:

  • bail! for early returns with an error.
  • ensure! for asserting conditions and returning an error on failure.
  • Context for adding context to errors.
  • Result as a type alias for std::result::Result<T, anyhow::Error>.

These items are appropriately used in the new code segments for error handling and assertions.


11-11: Importing HashSet for efficient set operations. Approved!

The import statement brings in the HashSet type from the standard library's std::collections module. HashSet represents a collection of unique elements and provides efficient membership testing and insertion.

The HashSet type is appropriately used in the new code segments for:

  • Collecting and comparing the blue sets in verify_and_ghostdata and check_ghostdata_blue_block.
  • Deduplicating the mergeset blocks in verify_and_ghostdata.

The import statement is necessary for using HashSet in 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 anyhow and starcoin_logger crates are valid and do not introduce any issues.


26-27: LGTM!

The new import HashSet from the standard library is valid and does not introduce any issues.


148-295: LGTM!

The new commit_trusted_block method 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 BlockDAG struct by allowing the commitment of a block header along with trusted ghost data.


430-431: LGTM!

The modification to the get_dag_state method to accept a hash parameter 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_state method to accept a hash parameter along with the state is 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_tips method enhance the pruning logic and improve consistency:

  • It now considers the previous_header's pruning point and the provided pruning_depth and pruning_finality to 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_header and 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_point method and the addition of the verify_and_ghostdata method enhance the verification process and strengthen the integrity checks:

  • The verify_pruning_point method now compares the provided next_pruning_point with the calculated expected value based on the previous_pruning_point, ghostdata, and the pruning parameters. This ensures that the pruning point follows the expected behavior.
  • The verify_and_ghostdata method 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_upgrade method improve the handling of version upgrades based on the main block header:

  • For version 0, it ensures that the DAG state is properly retrieved and stored based on the pruning_point from the main header. 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 DagBlockSender type in the code changes below.


35-38: LGTM!

The ParallelSign enum 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_sync instead of apply_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 to ensure_dag_parent_blocks_exist look good and introduce useful optimizations!

The modifications introduce a more dynamic approach to handling absent parent blocks during synchronization:

  • Returning ParallelSign allows 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 ParallelSign returned by ensure_dag_parent_blocks_exist appropriately:

  • Returning CollectorState::Need when more blocks are required allows the caller to continue fetching blocks.
  • Proceeding with execution when Continue is returned ensures the synchronization progresses as expected.

The logic aligns with the expected behavior based on the ParallelSign variants.


635-635: LGTM!

Checking for the block's existence in the DAG using self.chain.has_dag_block is 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_info to None when 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 BlockIdAndNumber struct in the code.


229-235: LGTM!

The SyncDagStore instance is correctly created with the configured sync directory path, cache size, and default RocksdbConfig.

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_block module 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_block module is being used in sync/src/parallel/sender.rs and sync/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_ghostdata function implementation looks good. It correctly commits a trusted block with the provided ghostdata and prints the commit duration.


970-975: LGTM!

The change to include a hash parameter in save_dag_state looks good and aligns with the alteration mentioned in the summary.


990-1217: Excellent test coverage!

The test_verification_blue_block function 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_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY constants 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_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY constants 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_hash function 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_ghostdata function 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_of function 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_dag function:

  • 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_dag function.


1567-1582: Verify the pruning heights with the project's requirements.

The get_pruning_height function 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_sync function introduces a synchronization-specific block application process that utilizes the DagVerifierWithGhostData verifier. 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.

flexidag/src/types/ordering.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
sync/Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
chain/src/chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as draft September 13, 2024 02:27
Copy link

Benchmark for 7d1db17

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 740.6±62.33µs 770.7±104.37µs +4.06%
block_apply/block_apply_10 375.9±5.15ms 387.3±14.55ms +3.03%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 38.3±0.61s 41.3±1.31s +7.83%
get_with_proof/db_store 48.8±9.16µs 47.7±5.42µs -2.25%
get_with_proof/mem_store 37.5±2.30µs 37.1±2.26µs -1.07%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 115.1±9.28µs 115.0±10.86µs -0.09%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 997.8±40.25µs 997.4±41.90µs -0.04%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 9.2±0.33ms 9.6±0.53ms +4.35%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 660.9±235.74µs 639.6±212.27µs -3.22%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 4.9±0.26ms 4.9±0.21ms 0.00%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 73.0±6.36µs 72.7±6.48µs -0.41%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 680.7±52.05µs 686.2±54.97µs +0.81%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.5±0.39ms 6.8±0.79ms +4.62%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 340.7±27.60µs 345.7±28.36µs +1.47%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.3±0.14ms 3.3±0.16ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.8±0.44ms 8.6±0.30ms -2.27%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 87.6±3.18ms 85.6±7.08ms -2.28%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 883.4±13.34ms 874.6±28.15ms -1.00%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1707.6±36.66µs 1756.7±46.27µs +2.88%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 17.4±0.52ms 17.4±0.40ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 170.0±3.26ms 173.0±2.90ms +1.76%
storage_transaction 1083.3±420.82µs 1108.6±425.27µs +2.34%
vm/transaction_execution/1 404.2±7.08ms 414.9±9.05ms +2.65%
vm/transaction_execution/10 129.9±6.09ms 129.8±3.60ms -0.08%
vm/transaction_execution/20 134.7±14.94ms 124.2±7.65ms -7.80%
vm/transaction_execution/5 154.0±1.83ms 161.5±3.37ms +4.87%
vm/transaction_execution/50 136.5±6.02ms 138.2±5.78ms +1.25%

@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as ready for review September 13, 2024 05:40
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (3)

148-295: The commit_trusted_block function 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:

  1. Refactor the error handling code to reduce duplication and improve readability.
  2. Break down the function into smaller, more focused functions to enhance maintainability.

445-479: The changes to the calc_mergeset_and_tips function 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_header parameter to obtain pruning information from the previous block header.
  • Retrieving the DAG state using the pruning_point of the previous_header to ensure correspondence with the previous block.
  • Calculating the next pruning point based on the pruning_point of the previous_header and the ghostdata obtained from the tips in the DAG state.
  • Updating the conditions for returning the MineNewDagBlockInfo to compare the next pruning point with the pruning_point of the previous_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::Ok is used redundantly in both branches. Consider removing it for consistency with the rest of the code.


Line range hint 530-582: The changes to the check_upgrade function introduce version-specific state management logic based on the main block header's version.

For version 0:

  • The function attempts to retrieve the DAG state using the pruning_point of the main header.
  • 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 main header'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:

  1. Simplify the nested match statements for version 0 to enhance readability.
  2. Properly handle any errors that may occur during the insert operations instead of ignoring them with ?.
  3. 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between d012172 and f088974.

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 the get_dag_state function are appropriate and introduce more flexibility in retrieving DAG states.

  • The function now accepts a hash parameter, 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_state method by enabling targeted retrieval of DAG states based on hashes, rather than always fetching the default state.


434-436: The changes to the save_dag_state function are beneficial and provide more control over saving DAG states.

  • The function now accepts a hash parameter in addition to the state parameter.
  • The provided state is inserted into the storage's state_store using the hash as 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.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs (1)

87-92: Approve the addition of the ReachabilityView struct, but clarify its usage.

The introduction of the ReachabilityView struct aligns with the summary and provides a structured representation of the reachability information. The inclusion of the JsonSchema derive 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_of function is a great addition to the ChainApi trait. 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 function is_ancestor_of added to MockChainApi.

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 ReachabilityView wrapped in a FutureResult.

The addition of this function enhances the MockChainApi interface and is likely important for consensus and block validation processes. However, the actual implementation logic is currently missing, as indicated by the unimplemented!() macro.

Please ensure to:

  1. Implement the logic correctly to determine the reachability view based on the provided ancestor and descendants.
  2. Add comprehensive unit tests to verify the correctness of the implementation once it's completed.
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (2)

150-297: The commit_trusted_block method looks good overall with a few suggestions for improvement.

  • Consider using more specific error types instead of generic anyhow::Error for 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 the calc_mergeset_and_tips method 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between f088974 and 9c3a1ac.

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_cmd module 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_cmd module 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 insert method signature in the DagStateStore trait, which now requires a hash parameter, 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 insert method implementation in DbDagStateStore, which now uses the provided hash when 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 IsAncestorOfCommand is a valuable addition to the ChainRequest enum. 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 IsAncestorOfCommand variant to the ChainResponse enum complements the corresponding variant in the ChainRequest enum. It allows for returning the reachability information of the specified ancestor in relation to its descendants.

The reachability_view field of type ReachabilityView is 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_of function is a valuable addition to the ChainApi trait, 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::IsAncestorOfCommand request by:

  1. Extracting the ancestor and descendants fields from the request.
  2. Calling self.inner.dag.is_ancestor_of(ancestor, descendants) to check the reachability.
  3. Wrapping the result in a ChainResponse::IsAncestorOfCommand to send back to the client.

The code follows the existing pattern and integrates well with the ServiceHandler implementation.


261-262: Verify the is_ancestor_of method and reachability_view structure.

Please ensure that:

  1. The is_ancestor_of method correctly checks if the ancestor is reachable from each of the descendants in the DAG structure.
  2. The reachability_view field of the ChainResponse::IsAncestorOfCommand is structured appropriately to convey the result of the ancestor check.

To verify the is_ancestor_of method, run the following script:

To verify the reachability_view structure, run the following script:

Verification successful

The is_ancestor_of method and ReachabilityView structure are correctly implemented and used.

The code segment under review correctly uses the is_ancestor_of method with the ancestor and descendants arguments. The ReachabilityView structure 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. The ReachabilityView structure in flexidag/src/consensusdb/consenses_state.rs is 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_of function 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_state method are correct and necessary to retrieve the state associated with a specific hash.


436-437: LGTM!

The changes to the save_dag_state method are correct and necessary to save the state associated with a specific hash.


485-515: LGTM!

The changes to the verify_pruning_point method are correct and improve the pruning point verification logic by considering the previous pruning point and the ghostdata.


518-584: LGTM!

  • The reachability_store method is a simple getter method and looks good.
  • The verify_and_ghostdata method correctly delegates the verification and ghostdata generation to the ghost_dag_manager.
  • The changes to the check_upgrade method handle the state management correctly based on the block version.

169-209: Verify the ghostdata retrieval logic.

The ghostdata retrieval 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_block method 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_of method is a valuable addition to the RpcClient struct. It correctly utilizes a blocking RPC call to check the ancestry relationship between the provided ancestor and descendants hashes, and returns a ReachabilityView wrapped in a Result. The function signature, logic, and error handling are all implemented correctly.

This method enhances the functionality of the RpcClient by allowing it to perform ancestor checks, which could be crucial for maintaining the integrity of blockchain operations.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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-of command.

To improve the code readability and maintainability, consider adding documentation comments to the IsAncestorOfOpt and IsAncestorOfCommand structs and the run method. The comments should describe the purpose and behavior of the structs and methods.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9c3a1ac and 2a358fd.

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 IsAncestorOfCommand subcommand to the chain command 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.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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_block function 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2a358fd and 163e7b2.

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_ghostdata function is a valuable addition to the ChainReader trait. 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_height function 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_height function 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.

chain/src/chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 31e0321 and df3ed29.

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-point version. Please ensure that:

  1. The new image version is compatible with the rest of the deployment configuration.
  2. Thorough testing has been conducted to validate the functionality and stability of the pruning-point version in the target environment.

32-32: Clarify the purpose and implications of removing the genesis_config.json file.

The startup command has been updated to remove the genesis_config.json file along with the existing removal of the LOCK file. Please provide more context on:

  1. The purpose of removing the genesis_config.json file.
  2. 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_block method 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_state method looks correct and allows retrieving the DAG state based on a specific hash.


436-437: LGTM!

The modification to the save_dag_state method looks correct and allows saving the DAG state associated with a specific hash.


447-495: LGTM!

The modifications to the calc_mergeset_and_tips method 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_point method 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 provided next_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_store method looks correct and provides a convenient way to access the reachability_store from the BlockDAG struct.


537-544: LGTM!

The addition of the verify_and_ghostdata method looks correct and provides a convenient way to verify and retrieve the ghostdata using the ghost_dag_manager.


545-614: LGTM!

The modifications to the check_upgrade method look correct and handle the necessary state migrations for version upgrades. The method correctly retrieves and inserts the DAG state into the state_store based on the main block's version and pruning point.

The addition of the is_ancestor_of method 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 the check_ancestor_of method.

Copy link

Benchmark for c6d4882

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 739.4±56.17µs 749.5±48.29µs +1.37%
block_apply/block_apply_10 374.2±6.13ms 373.1±10.45ms -0.29%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 40.2±1.04s 39.2±1.01s -2.49%
get_with_proof/db_store 46.3±3.98µs 46.2±0.80µs -0.22%
get_with_proof/mem_store 36.5±0.83µs 37.6±1.68µs +3.01%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 115.9±4.30µs 118.5±4.84µs +2.24%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1043.8±87.14µs 1071.6±59.65µs +2.66%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 9.6±1.50ms 10.0±0.50ms +4.17%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 532.7±33.04µs 547.7±48.81µs +2.82%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 4.9±0.25ms 5.2±0.19ms +6.12%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 72.8±6.50µs 73.8±7.75µs +1.37%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 675.1±48.59µs 676.0±50.25µs +0.13%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.6±0.78ms 6.6±0.45ms 0.00%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 347.8±42.54µs 348.0±31.09µs +0.06%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.3±0.18ms 3.3±0.14ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.7±0.27ms 8.7±0.73ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 89.1±2.78ms 89.6±2.45ms +0.56%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 865.9±13.86ms 866.6±26.14ms +0.08%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1716.8±29.63µs 1770.7±32.13µs +3.14%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 17.1±0.63ms 17.6±0.30ms +2.92%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 171.6±2.38ms 175.5±1.32ms +2.27%
storage_transaction 1099.8±423.63µs 1061.3±469.83µs -3.50%
vm/transaction_execution/1 427.4±29.74ms 423.6±18.83ms -0.89%
vm/transaction_execution/10 130.9±8.34ms 129.9±3.74ms -0.76%
vm/transaction_execution/20 118.2±2.44ms 118.1±2.19ms -0.08%
vm/transaction_execution/5 157.5±5.91ms 163.6±5.22ms +3.87%
vm/transaction_execution/50 138.3±4.34ms 143.5±13.30ms +3.76%

@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as draft September 14, 2024 06:21
Copy link

Benchmark for bb8d060

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 751.7±66.86µs 752.3±68.71µs +0.08%
block_apply/block_apply_10 374.8±6.62ms 386.2±14.88ms +3.04%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 39.0±0.94s 38.8±1.00s -0.51%
get_with_proof/db_store 63.1±18.82µs 46.9±2.55µs -25.67%
get_with_proof/mem_store 37.9±1.16µs 37.6±3.16µs -0.79%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 120.2±5.18µs 119.5±9.75µs -0.58%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1008.8±46.50µs 1043.6±45.29µs +3.45%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 9.5±0.46ms 9.4±0.47ms -1.05%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 546.5±27.34µs 539.7±29.64µs -1.24%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 5.0±0.24ms 4.9±0.28ms -2.00%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 74.2±7.96µs 72.6±7.12µs -2.16%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 684.1±53.75µs 675.0±54.04µs -1.33%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.5±0.31ms 6.4±0.28ms -1.54%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 343.8±32.11µs 337.0±28.03µs -1.98%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.3±0.14ms 3.3±0.14ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.7±0.27ms 8.6±0.48ms -1.15%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 90.1±6.82ms 90.5±3.51ms +0.44%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 895.8±44.48ms 876.7±20.08ms -2.13%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1718.1±39.84µs 1797.4±79.95µs +4.62%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 17.2±0.20ms 17.8±0.34ms +3.49%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 177.1±10.49ms 179.8±3.12ms +1.52%
storage_transaction 1117.7±436.77µs 1064.3±387.94µs -4.78%
vm/transaction_execution/1 409.0±7.97ms 416.2±8.85ms +1.76%
vm/transaction_execution/10 129.1±3.96ms 130.0±6.65ms +0.70%
vm/transaction_execution/20 129.0±12.84ms 120.5±4.20ms -6.59%
vm/transaction_execution/5 160.6±6.23ms 158.5±3.53ms -1.31%
vm/transaction_execution/50 136.8±3.89ms 143.3±4.83ms +4.75%

Copy link

Benchmark for 7ed5614

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 747.8±55.17µs 766.1±85.40µs +2.45%
block_apply/block_apply_10 378.8±7.15ms 382.9±22.34ms +1.08%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 40.4±0.82s 39.4±1.12s -2.48%
get_with_proof/db_store 45.2±1.19µs 46.3±1.77µs +2.43%
get_with_proof/mem_store 37.8±2.08µs 37.9±2.01µs +0.26%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 117.1±10.82µs 114.7±6.35µs -2.05%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1024.5±37.06µs 1010.5±63.02µs -1.37%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 9.2±0.32ms 9.4±0.81ms +2.17%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 518.8±22.22µs 518.3±26.91µs -0.10%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 4.8±0.22ms 4.8±0.31ms 0.00%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 74.1±7.61µs 74.6±8.46µs +0.67%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 680.5±60.53µs 680.9±52.62µs +0.06%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.5±0.36ms 6.6±0.58ms +1.54%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 340.3±28.74µs 340.9±28.31µs +0.18%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.3±0.16ms 3.3±0.15ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.7±0.49ms 8.8±0.46ms +1.15%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 94.7±8.93ms 87.7±1.35ms -7.39%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 926.7±41.01ms 878.3±17.90ms -5.22%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 2.0±0.30ms 1779.6±20.06µs -11.02%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 18.2±0.50ms 23.9±7.64ms +31.32%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 184.0±13.97ms 180.6±2.68ms -1.85%
storage_transaction 1132.9±470.38µs 1088.0±429.57µs -3.96%
vm/transaction_execution/1 404.4±4.04ms 408.7±7.22ms +1.06%
vm/transaction_execution/10 145.9±31.61ms 129.8±5.23ms -11.03%
vm/transaction_execution/20 118.5±3.88ms 119.0±2.51ms +0.42%
vm/transaction_execution/5 158.2±2.70ms 159.3±4.14ms +0.70%
vm/transaction_execution/50 135.2±4.79ms 150.4±30.70ms +11.24%

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (1)

499-533: LGTM!

Accepting the previous and next pruning points and ghost data allows for more accurate verification of the pruning point. Comparing the calculated next pruning point with the provided one ensures consistency. Returning an error when the pruning points don't match is the correct behavior.

Consider removing the commented-out code block (lines 514-527) if it is no longer necessary:

-        // if (block_header.chain_id().is_vega()
-        //     || block_header.chain_id().is_proxima()
-        //     || block_header.chain_id().is_halley())
-        //     && block_header.pruning_point() == HashValue::zero()
-        // {
-        //     if next_pruning_point == genesis_id {
-        //         return anyhow::Ok(());
-        //     } else {
-        //         bail!(
-        //             "pruning point is not correct, it should update the next pruning point: {}",
-        //             next_pruning_point
-        //         );
-        //     }
-        // }
Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 38232f7 and f603fc3.

Files selected for processing (3)
  • flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (8 hunks)
  • flexidag/tests/tests.rs (5 hunks)
  • sync/src/parallel/sender.rs (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • sync/src/parallel/sender.rs
Additional comments not posted (20)
flexidag/src/blockdag.rs (9)

3-5: LGTM!

The imports are relevant and necessary for the BlockDAG implementation.


18-19: LGTM!

The imports are relevant and necessary for error handling and accessing pruning configuration.


22-23: LGTM!

The imports are relevant and necessary for logging and accessing the BlockHeader type.


117-122: LGTM!

Saving the DAG state after initializing with the genesis block is a logical step. Using the genesis_id as the key and setting the tips to vec![genesis_id] is correct.


446-450: LGTM!

Accepting the previous pruning point and ghost data allows for more accurate calculation of the mergeset and tips. Adding the pruning depth and finality parameters enables customization of the pruning process.


451-495: LGTM!

The code segment follows a logical flow to calculate the mergeset and tips based on the pruning points and ghost data. It handles the case when the next pruning point is the same as the previous one by returning the current state. It performs pruning and recalculates the mergeset blues when the pruning point changes.


548-593: LGTM!

The check_upgrade method ensures that the state is correctly set based on the main block's version and genesis ID. It handles cases where the state may not exist and initializes it accordingly. The logic for retrieving and inserting the state based on different keys is correct.


595-611: LGTM!

The is_ancestor_of method provides a convenient way to check the ancestry of multiple blocks at once. It uses check_ancestor_of internally to perform the actual ancestry check for each descendant. Filtering the descendants based on the ancestry check result is correct. Returning a ReachabilityView with the ancestor and filtered descendants provides a useful output.


435-438: LGTM!

Accepting a hash parameter allows for targeted saving of the DAG state, which is an improvement. Using insert with the provided hash and state is the correct way to save the DAG state.

Verify that all calls to save_dag_state have been updated to provide the hash parameter:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all calls to `save_dag_state` provide the `hash` parameter.

# Test: Search for `save_dag_state` calls.
# Expect: All calls to provide the `hash` parameter.
rg --type rust -A 5 $'save_dag_state\('
flexidag/tests/tests.rs (11)

326-335: LGTM!

The changes to use Hash::zero() for both inserting and retrieving the DagState are consistent and look good.


970-976: LGTM!

The changes for saving the DAG state using the genesis block ID and the DagState containing the tips look good.


977-996: LGTM!

The changes for determining the previous ghost data and pruning point based on the state of the last block in the main chain are implemented correctly.


1002-1007: LGTM!

The changes for calculating the merge set and tips using the previous pruning point, previous ghost data, pruning depth, and pruning finality look good.


1013-1019: LGTM!

The changes for saving the updated DAG state using the new pruning point and tips are implemented correctly.


1021-1027: LGTM!

The changes for adding a new block using the updated tips and the genesis block's parent hash look good.


1029-1038: LGTM!

The changes for calculating the new merge set and tips using the updated pruning point, ghost data, pruning depth, and pruning finality are implemented correctly.


1040-1045: LGTM!

The changes for verifying the new pruning point and tips by filtering the tips based on their ancestry relationship with the newly added block look good.


1183-1216: LGTM!

The changes for manipulating the ghost data to simulate scenarios where blue blocks turn red and vice versa are implemented correctly. This helps test the robustness of the ghost data integrity checks.


1218-1225: LGTM!

The changes for verifying that the checks detect the inconsistencies in the manipulated ghost data are implemented correctly. This ensures that the integrity checks are working as expected.


1320-1330: LGTM!

The changes for mining a new block using the combined ghost data from the normal and manipulated blocks and verifying the integrity of the resulting ghost data are implemented correctly. This ensures that the system can handle scenarios where blocks with different ghost data are mined together.

flexidag/src/blockdag.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as draft September 20, 2024 01:17
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as ready for review September 20, 2024 10:35
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
node/src/node.rs (1)

324-325: LGTM! The addition of pruning parameters to BlockDAG constructor is a good step towards managing blockchain data growth.

Please ensure that the chosen pruning_depth and pruning_finality values strike the right balance between data retention and disk space efficiency for your use case.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between f603fc3 and 6e6032d.

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 new BlockDAG initialization arguments.

The changes to the BlockDAG::new method, which now accepts G_PRUNING_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY as additional arguments, look good.

However, it's important to ensure that:

  1. The values of G_PRUNING_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY are appropriately set and validated in the starcoin_config::genesis_config module.
  2. The BlockDAG implementation correctly utilizes these new arguments to configure its pruning depth and finality settings.
  3. The impact of these changes on the overall behavior of the BlockDAG and 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_depth and pruning_finality fields to the PruningPointManagerT struct is a valid change. These fields likely serve as configuration parameters for the pruning point manager.


26-27: LGTM!

The updates to the new function and the initialization of the pruning_depth and pruning_finality fields are consistent with the changes made to the PruningPointManagerT struct. This allows the pruning depth and finality to be configurable during the creation of the PruningPointManagerT instance.

Also applies to: 32-33


41-42: LGTM!

The addition of the finality_score function is a valid change. It calculates the finality score by dividing the blue score by pruning_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_point is equal to next_pruning_point is a valid change. If the pruning points are the same, the function returns the tips of the dag_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_point function are valid and improve the clarity and functionality of the pruning point selection logic. Here are the key changes:

  1. The function signature is updated to accept previous_pruning_point, previous_ghostdata, and next_ghostdata, providing explicit access to the required data points.
  2. The calculation of min_required_blue_score_for_next_pruning_point is updated to use previous_ghostdata.blue_score, aligning with the new parameters.
  3. The loop condition is modified to compare next_ghostdata.blue_score with min_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.
  4. The loop iterates over the forward chain from previous_pruning_point to next_ghostdata.selected_parent, allowing for the selection of the appropriate pruning point.
  5. The loop breaks if the difference between next_ghostdata.blue_score and next_pruning_ghostdata.blue_score is less than self.pruning_depth, enforcing the pruning depth constraint.
  6. 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.
  7. The selected pruning point is logged using info!, providing visibility into the pruning process.
  8. The function returns HashValue::zero() if the selected parent of latest_pruning_ghost_data is the same as the selected parent of previous_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_point function.

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 BlockDAG constructor, 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_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY are 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.rs

Length 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 the check_upgrade method 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:

  1. Review the implementation of the check_upgrade method to ensure it doesn't rely on the removed parameters.
  2. If possible, run tests that cover various upgrade scenarios to ensure the expected behavior.
  3. Monitor the system during upgrades to catch any issues that may arise due to this change.
Verification successful

The check_upgrade method has been implemented with more comprehensive logic.

The new implementation in flexidag/src/blockdag.rs addresses the initial concerns about accuracy and data access. It now:

  1. Handles different block versions (0 and 1).
  2. Manages state storage for the genesis block and subsequent blocks.
  3. 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 new function correctly initializes a new BlockDAG instance with the provided parameters. The initialization of ghostdag_manager and pruning_point_manager looks good.


338-338: LGTM!

The commit function 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_state function correctly retrieves the DAG state using the state_store and the provided hash. The usage of get_state_by_hash method looks good.


449-452: LGTM!

The save_dag_state function correctly saves the DAG state using the state_store with the provided hash and state. The usage of insert method looks good.


460-506: LGTM!

The calc_mergeset_and_tips function 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 of get_dag_state, ghostdata, next_pruning_point, and prune methods looks good.


509-525: LGTM!

The verify_pruning_point function correctly verifies the correctness of the next pruning point. It calculates the expected next pruning point using the next_pruning_point method of the pruning_point_manager and compares it with the provided next_pruning_point. The error handling for pruning point mismatch looks good.


542-587: LGTM!

The check_upgrade function correctly handles state initialization during version upgrades. It retrieves the DAG state using the genesis_id or HashValue::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_of function correctly checks if a given block is an ancestor of a set of descendant blocks. It filters the descendants based on the result of check_ancestor_of method and returns a ReachabilityView containing the ancestor and filtered descendants. The usage of check_ancestor_of and the filtering logic looks good.

cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs (12)

904-909: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This code segment repeats the BlockDAG initialization logic. Refer to the earlier suggestion about refactoring to reduce code duplication.


1000-1005: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

Another occurrence of the same BlockDAG initialization code. Implementing the suggested refactoring can improve code maintainability.


1057-1062: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This segment also contains repeated BlockDAG initialization. Consider using the helper function to avoid duplication.


1588-1593: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

The BlockDAG::new initialization is repeated here. Refactoring as previously suggested can reduce code redundancy.


1945-1950: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This code replicates the BlockDAG initialization seen in other functions. Applying the earlier refactoring suggestion will help maintain consistency.


2292-2297: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

Yet another instance of repeated BlockDAG initialization. Utilizing a helper function can enhance code clarity and reduce errors.


2329-2334: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This duplication can be avoided by implementing the suggested helper function for BlockDAG creation.


2467-2471: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This repeated code can be refactored using the previously mentioned helper function to minimize redundancy.


2583-2584: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

The BlockDAG::new call here mirrors previous instances. Refactoring will help keep the codebase DRY.


2630-2631: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

Consider applying the earlier refactoring suggestion to this code segment to reduce duplication.


2693-2694: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

This is another occurrence of the repeated BlockDAG initialization. Using the helper function will enhance maintainability.


2731-2732: Duplicate BlockDAG initialization detected

Refactoring this repeated code as previously suggested can improve code quality and consistency.

sync/src/tasks/test_tools.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cmd/db-exporter/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as draft September 23, 2024 08:44
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang marked this pull request as ready for review September 23, 2024 10:06
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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 assertions

The test_prune function has been significantly improved:

  1. It now uses specific pruning parameters, enhancing the test's precision.
  2. The pruning process is more detailed, including calculations of previous ghost data and pruning points.
  3. 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:

  1. Test pruning with different k, pruning_depth, and pruning_finality values.
  2. Test pruning behavior when the DAG is at the pruning threshold.
  3. 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 checks

The test_verification_blue_block function has been significantly enhanced:

  1. It now uses the global pruning parameters, ensuring consistency with the rest of the system.
  2. New logic has been added to test the integrity of ghost data when blocks are maliciously changed from blue to red and vice versa.
  3. Additional assertions verify that the check_ghostdata_blue_block function 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

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6e6032d and 41d5def.

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 constants

The addition of G_PRUNING_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY imports 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 methods

The change to use insert(Hash::zero(), state.clone()) and get_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 codebase

The usage of Hash::zero() in both insert and get_state_by_hash methods aligns with its existing implementations throughout the codebase. This confirms that Hash::zero() is intentionally used as the default hash value, ensuring consistency in state management.

  • Verified occurrences in:
    • flexidag/src/blockdag.rs
    • flexidag/tests/tests.rs
Scripts 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

flexidag/tests/tests.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
flexidag/tests/tests.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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_state function has been significantly enhanced:

  1. It now accepts both hash and state parameters for more precise state management.
  2. It implements a merging strategy for tips when a state already exists, ensuring consistency.
  3. 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 of write() 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_tips function has been significantly enhanced:

  1. It now considers the previous pruning point and ghost data for more accurate calculations.
  2. It implements pruning logic when necessary, ensuring the DAG remains manageable.
  3. 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_of call in the is_ancestor_of method with a tracing::instrument macro for better observability, especially given its importance in the pruning process.


533-550: LGTM! Improved pruning point verification.

The verify_pruning_point function has been enhanced to provide more robust verification:

  1. It now accepts both previous and next pruning points and ghost data for comprehensive verification.
  2. It calculates the expected next pruning point based on the previous state.
  3. 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 custom if check 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_upgrade function provides a robust mechanism for handling version upgrades:

  1. It specifically handles version 0 and 1 upgrades.
  2. It ensures proper state initialization based on the main block header.
  3. 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_state helper function to encapsulate the logic for retrieving or creating the DAG state.


613-629: LGTM! New ancestor relationship checking function.

The new is_ancestor_of function provides an efficient way to check ancestor relationships for multiple descendants:

  1. It filters the provided descendants based on their relationship to the given ancestor.
  2. It uses the existing check_ancestor_of method for individual checks.
  3. It returns a ReachabilityView struct with the results, improving the API's usability.

This addition enhances the DAG's ability to perform bulk ancestor checks efficiently.

Consider using anyhow::Result instead of unwrap_or(false) in the filter closure for better error propagation. This would allow you to handle potential errors from check_ancestor_of more gracefully.

genesis/src/lib.rs (1)

373-385: LGTM! Consider adding documentation.

The implementation of init_storage_for_test_with_param looks good. It provides more flexibility for testing scenarios by allowing customization of the BlockDAG parameters.

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 information

The debug! macro is used to log tips and pruning points. If this information is essential for the test output, consider using info! to ensure it appears in logs when the debug level is higher.


112-113: Handle potential errors explicitly

At 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 name prevous_ghostdata

There's a typo in the variable name prevous_ghostdata. It should be previous_ghostdata for clarity and consistency.

Apply this diff to fix the typo:

-        let prevous_ghostdata = self
+        let previous_ghostdata = self

Also, update all subsequent references to this variable.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 41d5def and b7d157d.

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_state function has been updated to accept a hash parameter, 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 BlockDAG implementation. The addition of the MineNewDagBlockInfo struct provides a clear structure for returning information from the calc_mergeset_and_tips function.

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_dag function 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 the set_reindex_root call.


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 ghostdata and tips in 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::new call now includes additional parameters related to the DAG structure, such as tips, blue_blocks, and pruning_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_point parameter 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 assertion

The assertion at line 93 checks that block_blue_7 has a pruning point equal to block_blue_2.id(). Ensure this aligns with the expected pruning logic in the blockchain.

Run the following script to confirm that block_blue_2 is the correct pruning point:

chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (1)

222-283: Overall implementation of pruning logic appears sound

The new produce_block_for_pruning method effectively implements the pruning logic by utilizing DAG and ghost data appropriately. The approach aligns with the intended functionality.

chain/tests/test_prune.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
chain/tests/test_prune.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +76 to +88
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()
])
);
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ 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.

chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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_ancestor function 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 u64 value. 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

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b7d157d and 2d3745e.

📒 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:

  1. Frequency of parallel execution triggers
  2. Time spent in parallel execution
  3. 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_time and sync_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' ./src

Length 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/src

Length of output: 1963

Copy link

Benchmark for ff8aaf3

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 858.9±168.32µs 892.9±177.13µs +3.96%
block_apply/block_apply_10 424.6±32.64ms 361.5±10.79ms -14.86%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 48.8±2.89s 41.3±1.66s -15.37%
get_with_proof/db_store 43.1±1.09µs 46.9±3.47µs +8.82%
get_with_proof/mem_store 36.1±3.37µs 41.1±4.65µs +13.85%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 131.4±21.22µs 157.3±23.20µs +19.71%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1176.2±117.55µs 1213.1±176.29µs +3.14%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 10.7±1.50ms 10.9±1.15ms +1.87%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 559.5±37.02µs 573.5±48.71µs +2.50%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 5.1±0.34ms 5.4±0.53ms +5.88%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 76.7±14.73µs 71.0±7.05µs -7.43%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 697.7±99.72µs 700.5±108.94µs +0.40%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.6±0.51ms 6.5±0.46ms -1.52%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 335.4±44.87µs 349.5±48.15µs +4.20%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 4.2±0.81ms 3.2±0.20ms -23.81%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 10.9±2.17ms 8.4±0.53ms -22.94%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 97.0±8.18ms 90.0±7.30ms -7.22%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 1065.0±151.22ms 862.1±71.07ms -19.05%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1895.7±295.76µs 1370.3±148.11µs -27.72%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 19.2±3.02ms 13.2±0.93ms -31.25%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 186.0±15.28ms 132.0±6.50ms -29.03%
storage_transaction 1165.0±411.97µs 1145.5±464.08µs -1.67%
vm/transaction_execution/1 414.6±24.55ms 457.1±49.98ms +10.25%
vm/transaction_execution/10 134.9±6.77ms 177.6±13.14ms +31.65%
vm/transaction_execution/20 141.0±17.57ms 153.5±14.35ms +8.87%
vm/transaction_execution/5 176.5±16.82ms 260.4±12.07ms +47.54%
vm/transaction_execution/50 142.8±5.04ms 166.7±16.36ms +16.74%

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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 recommendations

This review has identified two significant changes in the Kubernetes manifest:

  1. The container image has been updated to starcoin/starcoin:pruning-point, indicating a major change in the application logic related to pruning.
  2. 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:

  1. Provide detailed information about the changes introduced in the new image.
  2. Justify the removal of the readiness probe or consider reinstating it.
  3. Ensure thorough testing has been performed in a staging environment that mimics production.
  4. Plan for careful monitoring during and after deployment.
  5. Consider a phased rollout strategy to minimize risks.
  6. 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

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2d3745e and 07de3ce.

📒 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 change

The 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:

  1. Kubernetes will no longer be able to determine when the pod is ready to serve traffic.
  2. This might lead to premature routing of requests to pods that aren't fully initialized.
  3. It could impact the effectiveness of rolling updates and the overall reliability of the deployment.

Please consider the following:

  1. Was this removal intentional? If so, could you provide the rationale behind this decision?
  2. If it wasn't intentional, please reinstate the readiness probe.
  3. 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"
fi
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs (2)

203-221: LGTM: New produce_block_by_params method

The new method produce_block_by_params provides fine-grained control over block production by allowing the specification of parent_header, tips, and pruning_point. This addition enhances the flexibility of the MockChain for testing scenarios.


Line range hint 1-390: Overall assessment: Pruning logic implementation looks good

The changes introduced in this PR successfully implement the pruning logic as intended. The new methods new_with_params, produce_block_by_params, and produce_block_for_pruning enhance the MockChain struct's capabilities, allowing for more flexible testing scenarios and better control over block production and pruning.

Key improvements:

  1. More granular control over MockChain initialization with pruning parameters.
  2. Ability to produce blocks with specific parameters, including pruning points.
  3. 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.

kube/manifest/starcoin-halley.yaml Show resolved Hide resolved
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
chain/mock/src/mock_chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

Benchmark for 3ef14fc

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 813.6±119.72µs 877.9±184.82µs +7.90%
block_apply/block_apply_10 446.7±46.46ms 365.5±9.30ms -18.18%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 45.8±3.02s 42.8±1.78s -6.55%
get_with_proof/db_store 45.8±2.99µs 43.5±2.15µs -5.02%
get_with_proof/mem_store 39.0±5.24µs 36.1±1.69µs -7.44%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 133.7±14.46µs 126.7±13.13µs -5.24%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1256.3±227.20µs 1619.2±360.39µs +28.89%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 12.0±2.33ms 13.0±2.31ms +8.33%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 646.8±101.12µs 920.3±110.71µs +42.29%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 5.8±1.38ms 6.4±0.75ms +10.34%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 73.2±10.69µs 78.5±16.54µs +7.24%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 672.5±66.15µs 1019.1±184.25µs +51.54%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.6±0.36ms 8.7±1.72ms +31.82%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 336.3±38.98µs 349.2±50.47µs +3.84%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.4±0.32ms 4.5±0.90ms +32.35%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 9.0±0.37ms 8.7±0.97ms -3.33%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 94.4±6.09ms 92.3±9.93ms -2.22%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 946.4±58.06ms 836.6±32.45ms -11.60%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 2.2±0.60ms 1508.7±197.27µs -31.42%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 22.2±3.37ms 12.3±0.28ms -44.59%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 189.6±26.82ms 143.8±17.95ms -24.16%
storage_transaction 1194.3±441.05µs 1186.7±396.44µs -0.64%
vm/transaction_execution/1 599.8±85.57ms 418.0±18.56ms -30.31%
vm/transaction_execution/10 150.0±11.54ms 133.2±5.13ms -11.20%
vm/transaction_execution/20 127.9±6.04ms 145.6±11.22ms +13.84%
vm/transaction_execution/5 173.8±13.27ms 181.3±16.63ms +4.32%
vm/transaction_execution/50 161.0±16.11ms 147.9±12.89ms -8.14%

Copy link

Benchmark for 14175cf

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 836.0±160.50µs 772.9±72.49µs -7.55%
block_apply/block_apply_10 433.8±54.45ms 436.9±27.76ms +0.71%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 44.9±2.53s 41.7±1.23s -7.13%
get_with_proof/db_store 46.8±5.77µs 55.3±12.07µs +18.16%
get_with_proof/mem_store 35.8±1.21µs 45.0±7.84µs +25.70%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 122.5±16.80µs 130.5±15.96µs +6.53%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1121.8±129.92µs 1198.5±166.46µs +6.84%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 10.0±0.65ms 10.1±0.67ms +1.00%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 606.8±52.13µs 574.6±69.94µs -5.31%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 5.3±0.33ms 5.1±0.41ms -3.77%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 70.5±8.00µs 74.4±10.02µs +5.53%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 671.6±62.69µs 665.0±65.38µs -0.98%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 6.9±1.08ms 6.5±0.44ms -5.80%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 370.1±75.97µs 388.1±80.95µs +4.86%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.6±0.56ms 3.4±0.60ms -5.56%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.7±0.22ms 8.6±0.96ms -1.15%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 138.3±33.92ms 84.3±4.00ms -39.05%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 942.7±76.22ms 828.2±30.65ms -12.15%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1795.8±145.14µs 1225.5±84.51µs -31.76%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 19.1±4.20ms 12.2±0.69ms -36.13%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 173.6±8.29ms 120.9±3.32ms -30.36%
storage_transaction 1415.6±523.83µs 948.1±312.93µs -33.02%
vm/transaction_execution/1 432.8±32.28ms 416.4±22.29ms -3.79%
vm/transaction_execution/10 136.3±5.82ms 133.9±6.31ms -1.76%
vm/transaction_execution/20 137.9±13.82ms 124.3±7.96ms -9.86%
vm/transaction_execution/5 175.0±18.79ms 164.4±4.98ms -6.06%
vm/transaction_execution/50 146.4±6.26ms 147.5±8.90ms +0.75%

Copy link

Benchmark for 4598988

Click to view benchmark
Test Base PR %
accumulator_append 858.1±150.07µs 840.3±145.55µs -2.07%
block_apply/block_apply_10 405.3±49.65ms 376.7±12.70ms -7.06%
block_apply/block_apply_1000 45.2±3.32s 43.7±1.97s -3.32%
get_with_proof/db_store 46.2±4.13µs 47.7±3.34µs +3.25%
get_with_proof/mem_store 40.2±4.46µs 41.4±6.36µs +2.99%
put_and_commit/db_store/1 133.3±23.25µs 138.6±22.83µs +3.98%
put_and_commit/db_store/10 1097.5±85.31µs 1205.0±222.19µs +9.79%
put_and_commit/db_store/100 10.6±0.65ms 10.6±1.68ms 0.00%
put_and_commit/db_store/5 862.5±167.74µs 613.5±70.26µs -28.87%
put_and_commit/db_store/50 7.7±0.94ms 5.2±0.34ms -32.47%
put_and_commit/mem_store/1 80.1±13.72µs 76.3±13.05µs -4.74%
put_and_commit/mem_store/10 737.2±134.56µs 718.4±109.14µs -2.55%
put_and_commit/mem_store/100 7.5±1.11ms 6.5±0.44ms -13.33%
put_and_commit/mem_store/5 336.2±36.26µs 346.1±43.37µs +2.94%
put_and_commit/mem_store/50 3.3±0.23ms 3.3±0.24ms 0.00%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(100) 8.8±0.49ms 9.9±0.91ms +12.50%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(1000) 93.9±13.33ms 93.4±11.20ms -0.53%
query_block/query_block_in(10)_times(10000) 911.1±39.50ms 847.7±42.21ms -6.96%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(100) 1916.1±207.80µs 1437.2±117.45µs -24.99%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(1000) 18.7±1.84ms 14.8±1.90ms -20.86%
query_block/query_block_in(1000)_times(10000) 176.5±11.89ms 161.6±23.02ms -8.44%
storage_transaction 1279.3±551.84µs 1022.1±392.59µs -20.10%
vm/transaction_execution/1 446.3±47.33ms 419.4±14.36ms -6.03%
vm/transaction_execution/10 150.8±11.95ms 150.7±14.17ms -0.07%
vm/transaction_execution/20 130.7±9.46ms 135.9±11.37ms +3.98%
vm/transaction_execution/5 168.8±9.90ms 205.7±12.65ms +21.86%
vm/transaction_execution/50 143.0±4.73ms 147.4±6.02ms +3.08%

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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_params method 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_pruning method implements a specialized block production process for pruning. The implementation looks correct and includes proper error handling. The use of the debug! 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:

  1. Extract the logic for calculating the previous pruning point (lines 255-259) into a separate method.
  2. Create a helper method for retrieving and validating the previous ghostdata (lines 261-265).
  3. Move the calc_mergeset_and_tips logic (lines 267-274) into its own method.

Add comprehensive documentation for this method, explaining:

  1. The purpose of the method
  2. The steps involved in the pruning block production process
  3. 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_blockdag and new methods enhance the flexibility of the BlockDAG creation process by allowing customization of pruning parameters. The use of G_PRUNING_DEPTH and G_PRUNING_FINALITY constants in create_blockdag ensures consistency with global settings.

Consider adding documentation comments to explain the purpose and impact of the pruning_depth and pruning_finality parameters in the new method.

Also applies to: 68-68, 81-86


448-478: LGTM: Improved state management with hash-based retrieval and saving.

The changes to get_dag_state and save_dag_state enhance the precision of state management by using a hash parameter. The refactoring of save_dag_state improves the handling of tips, ensuring that only non-ancestor tips are retained.

Consider improving the error handling in the check_ancestor_of call within save_dag_state. Instead of using unwrap_or_else with 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_tips improve 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 MineNewDagBlockInfo into 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_upgrade method 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_of method enhances the reachability capabilities of the BlockDAG by 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_of and may improve performance for large sets of descendants. Be sure to adjust the batch_size based on performance testing in your specific use case.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ba5d0b2 and 218e7a0.

📒 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_params method provides a flexible way to create a MockChain instance 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 of expect, 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, and ReachabilityView align well with the enhanced state management and reachability operations introduced in this update. The addition of ensure from anyhow suggests improved error handling throughout the code.

Also applies to: 18-19, 23-23


101-101: LGTM: Enhanced testing capabilities.

The changes to create_for_testing and the addition of create_for_testing_with_parameters significantly improve the testing capabilities for the BlockDAG struct. These modifications allow for more flexible and thorough testing by enabling the creation of BlockDAG instances with customized parameters.

Also applies to: 104-111


537-554: LGTM: Simplified and generalized pruning point verification.

The changes to verify_pruning_point successfully 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 BlockDAG implementation in several key areas:

  1. Enhanced state management with hash-based retrieval and saving.
  2. Improved pruning logic and verification process.
  3. Added support for version upgrades and compatibility checks.
  4. Enhanced reachability capabilities with the new is_ancestor_of method.
  5. Improved flexibility in BlockDAG creation 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.

@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang merged commit ea56f4a into dag-master Oct 8, 2024
5 of 7 checks passed
@jackzhhuang jackzhhuang deleted the pruning-point branch October 8, 2024 13:51
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Oct 9, 2024
7 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants