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

Make initial block index loading faster #1420

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2024
Merged

Conversation

psolstice
Copy link
Contributor

@psolstice psolstice commented Mar 8, 2024

PR intention

Speed up loading block index from disk.

Code changes brief

Code eliminates the check of PoW for all the block headers except last 10000.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Introduced an option to enforce Proof of Work (PoW) verification for the last N blocks at startup, enhancing the security and integrity of the block index.
  • Refactor
    • Updated block index checks handling for improved efficiency and flexibility.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 8, 2024

Walkthrough

The update introduces a flexible mechanism for checking the Proof of Work (PoW) of blockchain blocks during client startup. It adds an option to either perform a comprehensive PoW check for all blocks or limit the verification to the most recent ones, depending on a specified flag. This enhancement aims to improve startup efficiency without compromising the integrity of the blockchain.

Changes

Files Change Summary
src/txdb.cpp, src/txdb.h Updated to support conditional PoW checks for blocks on startup, based on the -fullblockindexcheck flag. Introduce constants for default behavior and the number of recent blocks to check.

🐰✨
In the realm of code, where blocks align,
A rabbit hopped, making blockchain refine.
"Let's check the work, but wisely so,
For not all blocks need our thorough glow.
With a flag to guide, we hop with ease,
Ensuring integrity, in the digital breeze."
🌟🐾

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit-tests for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 2

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8bd4abd and 6bcd96e.
Files selected for processing (2)
  • src/txdb.cpp (3 hunks)
  • src/txdb.h (1 hunks)

Comment on lines +46 to +49
//! By default don't check block index PoW on client startup
static const bool DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK = false;
//! If not doing full check of block index, check only N of the latest blocks
static const int DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK = 10000;
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The introduction of DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK and DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK constants is a significant change aimed at optimizing the initial block index loading process. However, there are a few considerations and recommendations:

  • Documentation: It's crucial to document these constants, explaining their purpose, usage, and the rationale behind the default values. This will aid in maintainability and understanding for future developers.
  • Configuration Flexibility: While the PR introduces a mechanism to control the depth of the block index check via a flag, consider exposing DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK as a configurable parameter (e.g., via a configuration file or command-line argument). This would provide operators with greater flexibility in tuning the system based on their specific needs or constraints.
  • Validation: Ensure that there is validation in place for the DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK value, especially if it becomes user-configurable. For example, negative values should be disallowed, and there might be a reasonable upper limit to consider.
+ // Documentation for DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK
+ // Documentation for DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK
+ // Consider making DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK configurable
+ // Add validation for DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK

Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.

Suggested change
//! By default don't check block index PoW on client startup
static const bool DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK = false;
//! If not doing full check of block index, check only N of the latest blocks
static const int DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK = 10000;
//! By default don't check block index PoW on client startup
// Documentation for DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK
static const bool DEFAULT_FULL_BLOCKINDEX_CHECK = false;
//! If not doing full check of block index, check only N of the latest blocks
// Documentation for DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK
// Consider making DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK configurable
// Add validation for DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK
static const int DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK = 10000;

Comment on lines 416 to 437

pindexNew->activeDisablingSporks = diskindex.activeDisablingSporks;

if (!CheckProofOfWork(pindexNew->GetBlockPoWHash(), pindexNew->nBits, consensusParams))
return error("LoadBlockIndex(): CheckProofOfWork failed: %s", pindexNew->ToString());
if (fCheckPoWForAllBlocks) {
if (!CheckProofOfWork(pindexNew->GetBlockPoWHash(), pindexNew->nBits, consensusParams))
return error("LoadBlockIndex(): CheckProofOfWork failed: %s", pindexNew->ToString());
}
else {
if (pindexNew->nHeight >= firstInLastNBlocksHeight) {
lastNBlocks.insert(std::pair<int, CBlockIndex*>(pindexNew->nHeight, pindexNew));
if (lastNBlocks.size() > DEFAULT_BLOCKINDEX_NUMBER_OF_BLOCKS_TO_CHECK) {
// pop the first element from the map
auto firstElement = lastNBlocks.begin();
auto elementToPop = firstElement++;
lastNBlocks.erase(elementToPop);
firstInLastNBlocksHeight = firstElement->first;
}
}
}

pcursor->Next();
} else {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

📝 NOTE
This review was outside the diff hunks and was mapped to the diff hunk with the greatest overlap. Original lines [359-452]

The modifications to CBlockTreeDB::LoadBlockIndexGuts introduce a conditional check for Proof of Work (PoW) based on the -fullblockindexcheck flag and the number of most recent blocks. While this optimization aims to improve the initial block index loading speed, there are several areas that require attention:

  • Correctness: The logic for selectively checking PoW for the most recent blocks appears sound. However, ensure thorough testing, especially around edge cases such as blockchain reorganizations that might affect the set of the most recent blocks.
  • Performance: This change could significantly impact startup times. It would be beneficial to quantify this impact through benchmarking under various scenarios (e.g., with and without the flag enabled, with different values for the number of blocks to check).
  • Maintainability: The added complexity to LoadBlockIndexGuts increases the cognitive load for future maintainers. Consider refactoring to improve readability and maintainability. For example, extracting the logic for managing lastNBlocks into separate functions could make the code more modular and easier to understand.
  • Error Handling: Ensure that any failures in PoW checks lead to clear and actionable error messages, aiding in troubleshooting potential issues during startup.
+ // Refactor to improve maintainability
+ // Benchmark to quantify performance impact
+ // Ensure thorough testing, especially around edge cases
+ // Improve error handling and messaging

Copy link
Contributor

@levonpetrosyan93 levonpetrosyan93 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me

@reubenyap reubenyap merged commit f011c3a into master Mar 11, 2024
6 checks passed
@reubenyap reubenyap deleted the faster-load-block-index branch March 11, 2024 09:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants