feat(storage): better sender recovery if not found in database #4471
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rkrasiuk
added
A-db
Codecov Report
... and 18 files with indirect coverage changes
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
shekhirin
requested review from
rkrasiuk,
mattsse,
Rjected,
rakita,
joshieDo and
gakonst
as code owners
shekhirin
force-pushed
the
alexey/provider-sender-recover
branch
6 times, most recently
from
32bb376
to
06d48ff
Compare
rkrasiuk
approved these changes
Sep 4, 2023
Comment on lines
+452
to
+466
| if let Some((sender_tx_number, _)) = senders.peek() { | ||
| if sender_tx_number == tx_number { | ||
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` matches current transaction's | ||
| // `TxNumber`, advance the senders iterator. | ||
| senders.next(); | ||
| } else { | ||
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` doesn't match current transaction's | ||
| // `TxNumber`, add it to missing senders. | ||
| missing_senders.push((i, tx_number, transaction)); | ||
| } | ||
| } else { | ||
| // If there's no more senders left, but we're still iterating over | ||
| // transactions, add them to missing senders | ||
| missing_senders.push((i, tx_number, transaction)); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if let Some((sender_tx_number, _)) = senders.peek() { | |
| if sender_tx_number == tx_number { | |
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` matches current transaction's | |
| // `TxNumber`, advance the senders iterator. | |
| senders.next(); | |
| } else { | |
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` doesn't match current transaction's | |
| // `TxNumber`, add it to missing senders. | |
| missing_senders.push((i, tx_number, transaction)); | |
| } | |
| } else { | |
| // If there's no more senders left, but we're still iterating over | |
| // transactions, add them to missing senders | |
| missing_senders.push((i, tx_number, transaction)); | |
| } | |
| if lsenders.peek().map_or(false, |(sender_tx_number, _)| sender_tx_number == tx_number) { | |
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` matches current transaction's | |
| // `TxNumber`, advance the senders iterator. | |
| senders.next(); | |
| } else { | |
| // If current sender's `TxNumber` doesn't match current transaction's or | |
| // there're no more senders left, but we're still iterating over transactions, | |
| // add them to missing senders | |
| missing_senders.push((i, tx_number, transaction)); | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I made it even more verbose, because I personally often get confused by map_or(false, ... or map_or(true, ...
| // Insert recovered senders along with tx numbers at the corresponding indexes to the | ||
| // original `senders` vector | ||
| for ((i, tx_number, _), sender) in missing_senders.into_iter().zip(recovered_senders) { | ||
| senders.insert(i, (*tx_number, sender)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| senders.insert(i, (*tx_number, sender)); | |
| // Insert will put recovered senders at necessary positions and shift the rest | |
| senders.insert(i, (*tx_number, sender)); |
| if senders.len() != transactions.len() { | ||
| // Find all missing senders, their corresponding tx numbers and indexes to the original | ||
| // `senders` vector at which the recovered senders will be inserted | ||
| let mut missing_senders = Vec::with_capacity(transactions.len() - senders.len()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| let mut missing_senders = Vec::with_capacity(transactions.len() - senders.len()); | |
| // SAFETY: Transactions are always guaranteed to be in the database whereas | |
| // senders might be pruned | |
| let mut missing_senders = Vec::with_capacity(transactions.len() - senders.len()); |
joshieDo
reviewed
Sep 5, 2023
| ))?, | ||
| // SAFETY: Transactions are always guaranteed to be in the database whereas | ||
| // senders might be pruned. | ||
| if senders.len() != transactions.len() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: we can senders.reserve the remaining len
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#4280 had as assumption that senders can be only missing the beginning of the tx range requested from the database, because pruning is done in the chain growth direction.
The problem is that with #4431 we will have senders missing from the database in both beginning and end of the tx range, because pruner removes the senders from the beginning, and senders from the end are not written at all if
SenderRecoveryprune part isPruneMode::All.