Block import cleanups #4842
Merged
Block import cleanups #4842
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
…nt assumptions about blocks list
This was referenced Jun 20, 2024
bkchr
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2024
davxy
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2024
Merged
via the queue into
paritytech:master
with commit Jun 23, 2024
686aa23
155 of 158 checks passed
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 26, 2024
A few refactorings to block import and block verification that should not be controversial. Block verification before block import is stateless by design as described in https://substrate.stackexchange.com/a/1322/25 and the fact that it wasn't yet I consider to be a bug. Some code that requires it had to use `Mutex`, but I do not expect it to have a measurable performance impact. Similarly with block import checking whether block preconditions should not be an exclusive operation, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with checking a few competing blocks whose parent blocks exist at the same time (and even import them concurrently later, though IIRC this is not yet implemented either). They were originally a part of #4842 and upstreaming will help us to reduce the size of the patch we need to apply on top of upstream code at Subspace every time we upgrade. There are no new features introduced here, just refactoring to get rid of unnecessary requirements.
TarekkMA
pushed a commit
to moonbeam-foundation/polkadot-sdk
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2024
I carried these things in a fork for a long time, I think wouldn't hurt to have it upstream. Originally submitted as part of paritytech#1598 that went nowhere. --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
TarekkMA
pushed a commit
to moonbeam-foundation/polkadot-sdk
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2024
A few refactorings to block import and block verification that should not be controversial. Block verification before block import is stateless by design as described in https://substrate.stackexchange.com/a/1322/25 and the fact that it wasn't yet I consider to be a bug. Some code that requires it had to use `Mutex`, but I do not expect it to have a measurable performance impact. Similarly with block import checking whether block preconditions should not be an exclusive operation, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with checking a few competing blocks whose parent blocks exist at the same time (and even import them concurrently later, though IIRC this is not yet implemented either). They were originally a part of paritytech#4842 and upstreaming will help us to reduce the size of the patch we need to apply on top of upstream code at Subspace every time we upgrade. There are no new features introduced here, just refactoring to get rid of unnecessary requirements.
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.
I carried these things in a fork for a long time, I think wouldn't hurt to have it upstream.
Originally submitted as part of #1598 that went nowhere.