[checkpoint] local_fragments should be indexed on sequence number #4502
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
lxfind
force-pushed
the
checkout-local-fragment-add-seq
branch
from
dceda2c to
bca16cd
Compare
mystenmark
approved these changes
Sep 7, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
local_fragmentsare currently indexed onAuthorityName, which means that fragments in it can be from any checkpoint. Although we empty the entirelocal_fragmentstable whenever we are forming a new checkpoint, fragments from previous checkpoints can still show up inlocal_fragmentswhen a consensus message is delayed (i.e. receiving a fragment after the checkpoint is formed). And currently in all uses oflocal_fragments, we don't distinguish their checkpoint sequence number. This can lead to two issues: 1) we may be thinking that we have already fragmented with a validator, but in fact we haven't. 2) we may be using a fragment from previous checkpoint to construct a new checkpoint by thinking that there is a link to the spanning tree.