ERL: Use IP address instead of IP:port pair #6176
Open
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
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6176 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 51.79% 51.80% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 644 644
Lines 86511 86546 +35
==========================================
+ Hits 44805 44836 +31
- Misses 38834 38840 +6
+ Partials 2872 2870 -2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
cce
reviewed
Nov 20, 2024
algorandskiy
commented
Feb 14, 2025
| var capguard *util.ErlCapacityGuard | ||
| var isCMEnabled bool | ||
| var err error | ||
| if handler.erl != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
moved the handler.erl != nil check to processIncomingTxn
jannotti
reviewed
Feb 19, 2025
Comment on lines
+696
to
+706
| eic.m.Unlock() | ||
| // if no elements left, call the closer | ||
| // use atomic Swap in order to retrieve the closer and call it once | ||
| if empty { | ||
| // atomic.Value.Swap does not like nil values so use a typed nil | ||
| // and cast it to func() in order to compare with nil | ||
| if closer := eic.closer.Swap((func())(nil)).(func()); closer != nil { | ||
| closer() | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do you use both a mutex and an atomic? Could you protect the eic.clients and the eic.closer with the eic.m mutex, so you don't have to do the special handling/casting of the atomic?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
to reduce the mutex congestion: the close function could be relatively expensive and require own locks.
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.
Summary
Make ERL more strict by distinguishing IP addresses instead of connections.
Idea (basically as suggested in this comment: #6176 (comment))
erlClientMapperentity that maps sender's addresses to a meta peererlIPClient.erlIPClientfor senders (connections) with the same address and it's logic not changed.erlIPClienttracks senders with the same address.erlIPClientsets ownOnClosehandlers so that when network actually closes a connection, this handler is called.OnClosecalled to notify ERL about this client termination.Test Plan
erlIPClientunit testMemory use remained the same but the test does not have thousands of clients to tell for sure.