validation: followups for de-duplication of packages #23804
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
ACK fcc2f91 |
jnewbery
reviewed
Jan 1, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've left a few minor comments here, but there are a couple of more substantial comments in the original PR here: #22674 (review).
fcc2f91 to
0300cb1
Compare
instagibbs
reviewed
Jan 10, 2022
t-bast
approved these changes
Jan 10, 2022
The previous interface required callers to guess that the tx had been swapped and look up the tx again by txid to find a `MEMPOOL_ENTRY` result. This is a confusing interface. Instead, explicitly tell the caller that this transaction was `DIFFERENT_WITNESS` in the result linked to the mempool entry's wtxid. This gives the caller all the information they need in 1 lookup, and they can query the mempool for the other transaction if needed.
If/when witness replacement is implemented in the future, this test case can be easily replaced with witness replacement tests.
No behavior changes, just clarifications.
Behavior change: don't quit right after LimitMempoolSize() when a package is partially submitted. We should still send TransactionAddedToMempool notifications for transactions that were submitted. Not behavior change: add a new package validation result for mempool logic errors.
0300cb1 to
fa5aafc
Compare
fa5aafc to
3cd7f69
Compare
10 tasks
|
ACK 3cd7f69 |
t-bast
approved these changes
Jan 17, 2022
ariard
reviewed
Jan 25, 2022
| @@ -1088,7 +1096,6 @@ bool MemPoolAccept::SubmitPackage(const ATMPArgs& args, std::vector<Workspace>& | |||
| LimitMempoolSize(m_pool, m_active_chainstate.CoinsTip(), | |||
| gArgs.GetIntArg("-maxmempool", DEFAULT_MAX_MEMPOOL_SIZE) * 1000000, | |||
| std::chrono::hours{gArgs.GetIntArg("-mempoolexpiry", DEFAULT_MEMPOOL_EXPIRY)}); | |||
| if (!all_submitted) return false; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well technically if this code change now trigger a TransactionAddedToMempool(), I think we're changing the views of our CMainSignals consumers and that would constitute a behavior change. That said, if I'm correct, I don't think it's worthy to invalidate ACKs just to update commit description.
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 28, 2022
…ages 3cd7f69 [unit test] package parents are a mix (glozow) de075a9 [validation] better handle errors in SubmitPackage (glozow) 9d88853 AcceptPackage fixups (glozow) 2db77cd [unit test] different witness in package submission (glozow) 9ad211c [doc] more detailed explanation for deduplication (glozow) 83d4fb7 [packages] return DIFFERENT_WITNESS for same-txid-different-witness tx (glozow) Pull request description: This addresses some comments from review on e12fafd from bitcoin#22674. - Improve documentation about de-duplication: [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22674/files#r770156708) - Fix code looking up same-txid-different-witness transaction in mempool: [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22674/files#r770804029) - Improve the interface for when a same-txid-different-witness transaction is swapped: [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22674/files#r770782822) - Add a test for witness swapping: [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22674/files#r770804029) - Add a test for packages with a mix of duplicate/different witness/new parents: [comment](bitcoin#22674 (comment)) - Fix issue with not notifying `CValidationInterface` when there's a partial submission due to fail-fast: [comment](bitcoin#22674 (comment)) ACKs for top commit: achow101: ACK 3cd7f69 t-bast: LGTM, ACK bitcoin@3cd7f69 instagibbs: ACK 3cd7f69 ariard: ACK 3cd7f69 Tree-SHA512: a5d86ca86edab80a5a05fcbb828901c058b3f2fa2552912ea52f2871e29c3cf4cc34020e7aac2217959c9c3a01856f4bd3d631d844635b98144f212f76c2f3ef
|
Can I comment? |
Fabcien
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2022
Summary: This is a partial backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#23804 | core#23804]] bitcoin/bitcoin@9ad211c Test Plan: read comment Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D12911
Fabcien
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2022
Summary: No behavior changes, just clarifications. This is a partial backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#23804 | core#23804]] bitcoin/bitcoin@9d88853 Depends on D12911 Test Plan: `ninja all check-all` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D12912
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
This addresses some comments from review on e12fafd from #22674.
CValidationInterfacewhen there's a partial submission due to fail-fast: comment