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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
refactor(zetacore): delete ballots after maturity #2863
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
refactor(zetacore): delete ballots after maturity #2863
Changes from 9 commits
0a39fd8
16d21c4
9adb64e
0c0d077
7e771da
4779bda
1799d09
afaa312
bf3c438
fbf277b
8be7f3f
12f9baa
a2c01e1
68bd73a
b074dda
3c38438
5171ebd
e533f7e
3a807ec
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would just returning a
types.BallotListForHeight
be enough for the caller?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it should be fine , but this pr just renames the function ,
We can consider changing the signature in a separate PR, as the function is used in a few different places.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @swift1337 , we should add more encapsulation, the external module shouldn't need to provide a list of ballot
-> You provide an height
-> You can get all ballots from that height in the function
-> You delete all the ballots
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The primary reason for not doing that is that the ballots are already fetched once, and I would want to avoid reading the same data from the store twice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think you need to reread the store for ballots? The ballot list from height give the ID list that can be directly used in the delete function?
This is small optimization in any case I would consider the encapsulation of the code more important
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That is true, but the delete ballot event uses other fields of the ballot.
We could alternatively fire the event from abci.go, but I feel that firing it from the for loop is better.
IMO, the current design looks cleaner.
Fetch ballotslist -> Fetch Ballot -> distribute rewards -> delete them.
The new flow would be
Fetch ballots -> distribute rewards -> Fetch ballotslist ->Fetch Ballots -> delete them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The current interface doesn't respect encapsulation principle. We delete ballots from a list and a
BallotListForHeight
value, while the list of ballots can be derived from this height. Both values should be deleted atomically from the same inputs, the current interface allows an external module to create an inconsistent state for the ballotThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we need an event here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Once indexed, the event can be used to query details about deleted ballots without having to query an archive node with an older height.
#942 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do agree though we should remove the event if its not useful .
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree we should remove it. This will just cause further state size increases right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Events would go into the blockstore , and I think nodes have the option to not store them through configuration, events usually are not part of the application.db .
But yeah, we should avoid adding anything to the node that we don't need
The primary use case that I can think of , where we use the data from these events is for debugging to see if there is a particular observer missing votes consistently fro more than maturityBlocks