lighthouse/beacon_node/beacon_chain/src/schema_change.rs

207 lines
8.4 KiB
Rust
Raw Normal View History

//! Utilities for managing database schema changes.
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
mod migration_schema_v6;
mod migration_schema_v7;
mod types;
use crate::beacon_chain::{BeaconChainTypes, FORK_CHOICE_DB_KEY, OP_POOL_DB_KEY};
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
use crate::persisted_fork_choice::{PersistedForkChoiceV1, PersistedForkChoiceV7};
use crate::store::{get_key_for_col, KeyValueStoreOp};
use crate::validator_pubkey_cache::ValidatorPubkeyCache;
use operation_pool::{PersistedOperationPool, PersistedOperationPoolBase};
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
use slog::{warn, Logger};
use ssz::{Decode, Encode};
use ssz_derive::{Decode, Encode};
use std::fs;
use std::path::Path;
use std::sync::Arc;
use store::config::OnDiskStoreConfig;
use store::hot_cold_store::{HotColdDB, HotColdDBError};
use store::metadata::{SchemaVersion, CONFIG_KEY, CURRENT_SCHEMA_VERSION};
use store::{DBColumn, Error as StoreError, ItemStore, StoreItem};
const PUBKEY_CACHE_FILENAME: &str = "pubkey_cache.ssz";
/// Migrate the database from one schema version to another, applying all requisite mutations.
pub fn migrate_schema<T: BeaconChainTypes>(
db: Arc<HotColdDB<T::EthSpec, T::HotStore, T::ColdStore>>,
datadir: &Path,
from: SchemaVersion,
to: SchemaVersion,
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
log: Logger,
) -> Result<(), StoreError> {
match (from, to) {
// Migrating from the current schema version to iself is always OK, a no-op.
(_, _) if from == to && to == CURRENT_SCHEMA_VERSION => Ok(()),
// Migrate across multiple versions by recursively migrating one step at a time.
(_, _) if from.as_u64() + 1 < to.as_u64() => {
let next = SchemaVersion(from.as_u64() + 1);
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
migrate_schema::<T>(db.clone(), datadir, from, next, log.clone())?;
migrate_schema::<T>(db, datadir, next, to, log)
}
// Migration from v0.3.0 to v0.3.x, adding the temporary states column.
// Nothing actually needs to be done, but once a DB uses v2 it shouldn't go back.
(SchemaVersion(1), SchemaVersion(2)) => {
db.store_schema_version(to)?;
Ok(())
}
// Migration for removing the pubkey cache.
(SchemaVersion(2), SchemaVersion(3)) => {
let pk_cache_path = datadir.join(PUBKEY_CACHE_FILENAME);
// Load from file, store to DB.
ValidatorPubkeyCache::<T>::load_from_file(&pk_cache_path)
.and_then(|cache| ValidatorPubkeyCache::convert(cache, db.clone()))
.map_err(|e| StoreError::SchemaMigrationError(format!("{:?}", e)))?;
db.store_schema_version(to)?;
// Delete cache file now that keys are stored in the DB.
fs::remove_file(&pk_cache_path).map_err(|e| {
StoreError::SchemaMigrationError(format!(
"unable to delete {}: {:?}",
pk_cache_path.display(),
e
))
})?;
Ok(())
}
// Migration for adding sync committee contributions to the persisted op pool.
(SchemaVersion(3), SchemaVersion(4)) => {
// Deserialize from what exists in the database using the `PersistedOperationPoolBase`
// variant and convert it to the Altair variant.
let pool_opt = db
.get_item::<PersistedOperationPoolBase<T::EthSpec>>(&OP_POOL_DB_KEY)?
.map(PersistedOperationPool::Base)
.map(PersistedOperationPool::base_to_altair);
if let Some(pool) = pool_opt {
// Store the converted pool under the same key.
db.put_item::<PersistedOperationPool<T::EthSpec>>(&OP_POOL_DB_KEY, &pool)?;
}
db.store_schema_version(to)?;
Ok(())
}
// Migration for weak subjectivity sync support and clean up of `OnDiskStoreConfig` (#1784).
(SchemaVersion(4), SchemaVersion(5)) => {
if let Some(OnDiskStoreConfigV4 {
slots_per_restore_point,
..
}) = db.hot_db.get(&CONFIG_KEY)?
{
let new_config = OnDiskStoreConfig {
slots_per_restore_point,
};
db.hot_db.put(&CONFIG_KEY, &new_config)?;
}
db.store_schema_version(to)?;
Ok(())
}
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
// Migration for adding `execution_status` field to the fork choice store.
(SchemaVersion(5), SchemaVersion(6)) => {
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
// Database operations to be done atomically
let mut ops = vec![];
// The top-level `PersistedForkChoice` struct is still V1 but will have its internal
// bytes for the fork choice updated to V6.
let fork_choice_opt = db.get_item::<PersistedForkChoiceV1>(&FORK_CHOICE_DB_KEY)?;
if let Some(mut persisted_fork_choice) = fork_choice_opt {
migration_schema_v6::update_execution_statuses::<T>(&mut persisted_fork_choice)
.map_err(StoreError::SchemaMigrationError)?;
let column = PersistedForkChoiceV1::db_column().into();
let key = FORK_CHOICE_DB_KEY.as_bytes();
let db_key = get_key_for_col(column, key);
let op =
KeyValueStoreOp::PutKeyValue(db_key, persisted_fork_choice.as_store_bytes());
ops.push(op);
}
db.store_schema_version_atomically(to, ops)?;
Ok(())
}
// 1. Add `proposer_boost_root`.
// 2. Update `justified_epoch` to `justified_checkpoint` and `finalized_epoch` to
// `finalized_checkpoint`.
// 3. This migration also includes a potential update to the justified
// checkpoint in case the fork choice store's justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint
// combination does not actually exist for any blocks in fork choice. This was possible in
// the consensus spec prior to v1.1.6.
//
// Relevant issues:
//
// https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741
// https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727
// https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730
(SchemaVersion(6), SchemaVersion(7)) => {
// Database operations to be done atomically
let mut ops = vec![];
let fork_choice_opt = db.get_item::<PersistedForkChoiceV1>(&FORK_CHOICE_DB_KEY)?;
if let Some(persisted_fork_choice_v1) = fork_choice_opt {
// This migrates the `PersistedForkChoiceStore`, adding the `proposer_boost_root` field.
let mut persisted_fork_choice_v7 = persisted_fork_choice_v1.into();
let result = migration_schema_v7::update_fork_choice::<T>(
&mut persisted_fork_choice_v7,
db.clone(),
);
// Fall back to re-initializing fork choice from an anchor state if necessary.
if let Err(e) = result {
warn!(log, "Unable to migrate to database schema 7, re-initializing fork choice"; "error" => ?e);
migration_schema_v7::update_with_reinitialized_fork_choice::<T>(
&mut persisted_fork_choice_v7,
db.clone(),
)
.map_err(StoreError::SchemaMigrationError)?;
}
// Store the converted fork choice store under the same key.
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
let column = PersistedForkChoiceV7::db_column().into();
let key = FORK_CHOICE_DB_KEY.as_bytes();
let db_key = get_key_for_col(column, key);
let op =
KeyValueStoreOp::PutKeyValue(db_key, persisted_fork_choice_v7.as_store_bytes());
ops.push(op);
}
v1.1.6 Fork Choice changes (#2822) ## Issue Addressed Resolves: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2741 Includes: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
2021-12-13 20:43:22 +00:00
db.store_schema_version_atomically(to, ops)?;
Ok(())
}
// Anything else is an error.
(_, _) => Err(HotColdDBError::UnsupportedSchemaVersion {
target_version: to,
current_version: from,
}
.into()),
}
}
// Store config used in v4 schema and earlier.
#[derive(Debug, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Encode, Decode)]
pub struct OnDiskStoreConfigV4 {
pub slots_per_restore_point: u64,
pub _block_cache_size: usize,
}
impl StoreItem for OnDiskStoreConfigV4 {
fn db_column() -> DBColumn {
DBColumn::BeaconMeta
}
fn as_store_bytes(&self) -> Vec<u8> {
self.as_ssz_bytes()
}
fn from_store_bytes(bytes: &[u8]) -> Result<Self, StoreError> {
Ok(Self::from_ssz_bytes(bytes)?)
}
}