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

List of rolled back blocks in block_processor #1158

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

SergiySW
Copy link
Contributor

@SergiySW SergiySW commented Sep 7, 2018

No description provided.

@clemahieu
Copy link
Contributor

We can't filter out blocks that have been forced out because the winner can oscillate before quorum.

@SergiySW
Copy link
Contributor Author

SergiySW commented Sep 7, 2018

If winner will be changed before quorum it will be placed in forced deque, not regular blocks. So ongoing election won't be affected, only fresh bootstrap blocks cannot start same election again & again

@clemahieu
Copy link
Contributor

clemahieu commented Sep 7, 2018

That makes sense. So this is to prevent the same block from starting an election if it's already failed once. Should we add every hash that's not the winner at the end of an election in to this set? We need to consider how big we should allow this container to get and when we want to prune it.

@SergiySW
Copy link
Contributor Author

SergiySW commented Sep 7, 2018

Rolling back is very rare event (mostly during initial sync), so I think it's safe here without extra checks
For list of all loser blocks I better make new concurrent PR to check how it can affect performance

@rkeene rkeene added this to the V17.0 milestone Sep 10, 2018
@rkeene rkeene self-requested a review September 10, 2018 15:05
@SergiySW
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think better move this to 18.0

@SergiySW SergiySW modified the milestones: V17.0, V18.0 Nov 15, 2018
@SergiySW
Copy link
Contributor Author

No significant bootstrap speed improvements, proposed to close

@rkeene
Copy link
Contributor

rkeene commented Dec 28, 2018

We addressed this in other ways, closing this out.

@rkeene rkeene closed this Dec 28, 2018
@rkeene rkeene removed this from the V18.0 milestone Dec 28, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants