Skip to content

fix(mempool)!: stop accepting TXs in the mempool if we can't keep up with reCheckTX (backport #3314)#3336

Merged
hvanz merged 1 commit intov1.xfrom
mergify/bp/v1.x/pr-3314
Jun 24, 2024
Merged

fix(mempool)!: stop accepting TXs in the mempool if we can't keep up with reCheckTX (backport #3314)#3336
hvanz merged 1 commit intov1.xfrom
mergify/bp/v1.x/pr-3314

Conversation

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Jun 24, 2024

This PR is a combination of ideas from @ValarDragon, @hvanz and @sergio-mena to alleviate nodes that, while not having their mempool full "officially", they have too many TXs lingering in the mempool which causes them to fall behind.
The mechanism works as follows:

  • We mark when we start and end reChecking
  • If, by the time a new block is decided we are still running the previous reCheckTx, we declare the mempool as rechecktx-full
  • Otherwise, we declare the mempool as not rechecktx-full

We have tested this and it fixes the failing nightlies that are blocking us from cutting v1.0.0-rc1.

Some UTs need to be fixed, hence posting as draft for the moment.


PR checklist

  • Tests written/updated
  • Changelog entry added in .changelog (we use unclog to manage our changelog)
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/ or spec/) and code comments
  • Title follows the Conventional Commits spec

This is an automatic backport of pull request #3314 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).

…with reCheckTX (#3314)

This PR is a combination of ideas from @ValarDragon, @hvanz and
@sergio-mena to alleviate nodes that, while not having their mempool
full "officially", they have too many TXs lingering in the mempool which
causes them to fall behind.
The mechanism works as follows:

* We mark when we start and end reChecking
* If, by the time a new block is decided we are still running the
previous `reCheckTx`, we declare the mempool as rechecktx-full
* Otherwise, we declare the mempool as not rechecktx-full

We have tested this and it fixes the failing nightlies that are blocking
us from cutting `v1.0.0-rc1`.

Some UTs need to be fixed, hence posting as draft for the moment.

---

#### PR checklist

- [ ] Tests written/updated
- [x] Changelog entry added in `.changelog` (we use
[unclog](https://github.com/informalsystems/unclog) to manage our
changelog)
- [ ] Updated relevant documentation (`docs/` or `spec/`) and code
comments
- [x] Title follows the [Conventional
Commits](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/) spec

---------

Co-authored-by: Andy Nogueira <me@andynogueira.dev>
Co-authored-by: Dev Ojha <dojha@berkeley.edu>
Co-authored-by: hvanz <hernan.vanzetto@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Hernán Vanzetto <15466498+hvanz@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 0cd2907)
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 24, 2024 21:01
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team June 24, 2024 21:01
@hvanz hvanz merged commit 328c6f4 into v1.x Jun 24, 2024
@hvanz hvanz deleted the mergify/bp/v1.x/pr-3314 branch June 24, 2024 21:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants