reintroduce clear_resharding_data #10211
Merged
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
wacban
approved these changes
Nov 20, 2023
Comment on lines
+80
to
+83
| /// `is_next_block_epoch_start` works even if we didn't fully process the provided block. | ||
| /// This function works even if we garbage collected `BlockInfo` of the first block of the epoch. | ||
| /// Thus, this function is better suited for use in garbage collection. | ||
| fn is_last_block_in_finished_epoch(&self, hash: &CryptoHash) -> Result<bool, EpochError>; |
| @@ -475,6 +481,11 @@ impl EpochManagerAdapter for EpochManagerHandle { | |||
| epoch_manager.is_next_block_epoch_start(parent_hash) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| fn is_last_block_in_finished_epoch(&self, hash: &CryptoHash) -> Result<bool, EpochError> { | |||
| let epoch_manager = self.read(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is impl EpochManagerAdapter for EpochManagerHandle
nearcore/chain/epoch-manager/src/lib.rs
Line 61 in fdead43
The actual implementation of the method depends on specific EpochManager implementation of get_epoch_info. So we get EpochManager out of EpochManagerHandle and call is_last_block_in_finished_epoch there.
| @@ -1086,6 +1086,20 @@ impl EpochManager { | |||
| self.is_next_block_in_next_epoch(&block_info) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /// Relies on the fact that last block hash of an epoch is an EpochId of next next epoch. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow I didn't know that. Nice trick!
| // self.epoch_manager.as_ref(), | ||
| // *block_hash, | ||
| // )?; | ||
| chain_store_update.clear_resharding_data( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we enable the resharding tests test_shard_layout_upgrade_gc and test_shard_layout_upgrade_gc_v2?
shreyan-gupta
approved these changes
Nov 20, 2023
VanBarbascu
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2023
This reverts commit 5fa5470.
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.
Tested on updated #10193
is_next_block_epoch_startreadsBlockInfoof the first block of the epoch, which is not correct in the case of garbage collection.The previous version of the test was passing, because that
BlockInfowas still in the cache of the epoch manager (as we callis_next_block_epoch_starton every block)Implemented safer version of
is_next_block_epoch_start--is_last_block_in_finished_epoch(didn't think too much about the name, open to suggestions).is_last_block_in_finished_epochworks by relying on the fact that if we processed block, and it was the last block of an epoch according tois_next_block_epoch_start, then we wrote anEpochInfowith the hash of that block, andEpochInfois not garbage collectible.