invoices: refactor InvoiceDB to eliminate ScanInvoices
#8081
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -433,17 +433,18 @@ func fetchInvoiceNumByRef(invoiceIndex, payAddrIndex, setIDIndex kvdb.RBucket, | |
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // FetchPendingInvoices returns all invoices that have not yet been settled or | ||
| // canceled. The returned map is keyed by the payment hash of each respective | ||
| // invoice. | ||
| func (d *DB) FetchPendingInvoices(_ context.Context) ( | ||
| map[lntypes.Hash]invpkg.Invoice, error) { | ||
|
|
||
| result := make(map[lntypes.Hash]invpkg.Invoice) | ||
|
|
||
| err := kvdb.View(d, func(tx kvdb.RTx) error { | ||
| invoices := tx.ReadBucket(invoiceBucket) | ||
| if invoices == nil { | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| invoiceIndex := invoices.NestedReadBucket(invoiceIndexBucket) | ||
|
|
@@ -472,12 +473,23 @@ func (d *DB) ScanInvoices(_ context.Context, scanFunc invpkg.InvScanFunc, | |
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if invoice.IsPending() { | ||
| var paymentHash lntypes.Hash | ||
| copy(paymentHash[:], k) | ||
| result[paymentHash] = invoice | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return nil | ||
| }) | ||
| }, func() { | ||
| result = make(map[lntypes.Hash]invpkg.Invoice) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return result, nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // QueryInvoices allows a caller to query the invoice database for invoices | ||
|
|
@@ -2702,6 +2714,102 @@ func delAMPSettleIndex(invoiceNum []byte, invoices, | |
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // DeleteCanceledInvoices deletes all canceled invoices from the database. | ||
| func (d *DB) DeleteCanceledInvoices(_ context.Context) error { | ||
| return kvdb.Update(d, func(tx kvdb.RwTx) error { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I think it's probably not a good idea since we scan through all the invoices here and bolt's There was a problem hiding this comment. I think it depends on whether there's an error and how we handle the error, from this bench test, if we distinguish the errors here, each closure is executed exactly once. |
||
| invoices := tx.ReadWriteBucket(invoiceBucket) | ||
| if invoices == nil { | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| invoiceIndex := invoices.NestedReadWriteBucket( | ||
| invoiceIndexBucket, | ||
| ) | ||
| if invoiceIndex == nil { | ||
| return invpkg.ErrNoInvoicesCreated | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Think we should unify the behaviors here - in There was a problem hiding this comment. This case is different though right? We do return There was a problem hiding this comment. could it be the case that this is just an empty bucket? like all the invoices are deleted? There was a problem hiding this comment. No, if the bucket is empty we'd still get back the handle. There was a problem hiding this comment. Cool - then I'm curious in what case will this There was a problem hiding this comment. I think it's there to give us some reassurance that about expected existence of those buckets. Similar checks are done for other channeldb methods too. There was a problem hiding this comment. cool then I interpret it as a db corruption check. |
||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| invoiceAddIndex := invoices.NestedReadWriteBucket( | ||
| addIndexBucket, | ||
| ) | ||
| if invoiceAddIndex == nil { | ||
| return invpkg.ErrNoInvoicesCreated | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| payAddrIndex := tx.ReadWriteBucket(payAddrIndexBucket) | ||
|
|
||
| return invoiceIndex.ForEach(func(k, v []byte) error { | ||
| // Skip the special numInvoicesKey as that does not | ||
| // point to a valid invoice. | ||
| if bytes.Equal(k, numInvoicesKey) { | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Skip sub-buckets. | ||
| if v == nil { | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| invoice, err := fetchInvoice(v, invoices) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if invoice.State != invpkg.ContractCanceled { | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Delete the payment hash from the invoice index. | ||
| err = invoiceIndex.Delete(k) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Delete payment address index reference if there's a | ||
| // valid payment address. | ||
| if invoice.Terms.PaymentAddr != invpkg.BlankPayAddr { | ||
| // To ensure consistency check that the already | ||
| // fetched invoice key matches the one in the | ||
| // payment address index. | ||
| key := payAddrIndex.Get( | ||
| invoice.Terms.PaymentAddr[:], | ||
| ) | ||
| if bytes.Equal(key, k) { | ||
| // Delete from the payment address | ||
| // index. | ||
| if err := payAddrIndex.Delete( | ||
| invoice.Terms.PaymentAddr[:], | ||
| ); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Remove from the add index. | ||
| var addIndexKey [8]byte | ||
| byteOrder.PutUint64(addIndexKey[:], invoice.AddIndex) | ||
| err = invoiceAddIndex.Delete(addIndexKey[:]) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Note that we don't need to delete the invoice from | ||
| // the settle index as it is not added until the | ||
| // invoice is settled. | ||
|
|
||
| // Now remove all sub invoices. | ||
| err = delAMPInvoices(k, invoices) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Finally remove the serialized invoice from the | ||
| // invoice bucket. | ||
| return invoices.Delete(k) | ||
| }) | ||
| }, func() {}) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // DeleteInvoice attempts to delete the passed invoices from the database in | ||
| // one transaction. The passed delete references hold all keys required to | ||
| // delete the invoices without also needing to deserialze 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.
can we also add a case here to test the empty slice returned from
FetchPendingInvoices?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.
Yeah good idea! Done.