Currently there is a race between receiving blocks and receiving light client optimistic updates (in unstable), which results in processing errors. This is a continuation of PR #3693 and seeks to progress on issue #3651
Add the parent_root to ReprocessQueueMessage::BlockImported so we can remove blocks from queue when a block arrives that has the same parent root. We use the parent root as opposed to the block_root because the LightClientOptimisticUpdate does not contain the block_root.
If light_client_optimistic_update.attested_header.canonical_root() != head_block.message().parent_root() then we queue the update. Otherwise we process immediately.
michaelsproul came up with this idea.
The code was heavily based off of the attestation reprocessing.
I have not properly tested this to see if it works as intended.
* Import BLS to execution changes before Capella
* Test for BLS to execution change HTTP API
* Pack BLS to execution changes in LIFO order
* Remove unused var
* Clippy
We recently ran a large-block experiment on the testnet and plan to do a further experiment on mainnet.
Although the metrics recovered from lighthouse nodes were quite useful, I think we could do with greater resolution in the block delay metrics and get some specific values for each block (currently these can be lost to large exponential histogram buckets).
This PR increases the resolution of the block delay histogram buckets, but also introduces a new metric which records the last block delay. Depending on the polling resolution of the metric server, we can lose some block delay information, however it will always give us a specific value and we will not lose exact data based on poor resolution histogram buckets.
- there was a bug in responding range blob requests where we would incorrectly label the first slot of an epoch as a non-skipped slot if it were skipped. this bug did not exist in the code for responding to block range request because the logic error was mitigated by defensive coding elsewhere
- there was a bug where a block received during range sync without a corresponding blob (and vice versa) was incorrectly interpreted as a stream termination
- RPC size limit fixes.
- Our blob cache was dead locking so I removed use of it for now.
- Because of our change in finalized sync batch size from 2 to 1 and our transition to using exact epoch boundaries for batches (rather than one slot past the epoch boundary), we need to sync finalized sync to 2 epochs + 1 slot past our peer's finalized slot in order to finalize the chain locally.
- use fork context bytes in rpc methods on both the server and client side
## Issue Addressed
While testing withdrawals with @ethDreamer we noticed lighthouse is sending empty batches when an error occurs. As LH peer receiving this, we would consider this a low tolerance action because the peer is claiming the batch is right and is empty.
## Proposed Changes
If any kind of error occurs, send a error response instead
## Additional Info
Right now we don't handle such thing as a partial batch with an error. If an error is received, the whole batch is discarded. Because of this it makes little sense to send partial batches that end with an error, so it's better to do the proposed solution instead of sending empty batches.
## Issue Addressed
Implementing the light_client_gossip topics but I'm not there yet.
Which issue # does this PR address?
Partially #3651
## Proposed Changes
Add light client gossip topics.
Please list or describe the changes introduced by this PR.
I'm going to Implement light_client_finality_update and light_client_optimistic_update gossip topics. Currently I've attempted the former and I'm seeking feedback.
## Additional Info
I've only implemented the light_client_finality_update topic because I wanted to make sure I was on the correct path. Also checking that the gossiped LightClientFinalityUpdate is the same as the locally constructed one is not implemented because caching the updates will make this much easier. Could someone give me some feedback on this please?
Please provide any additional information. For example, future considerations
or information useful for reviewers.
Co-authored-by: GeemoCandama <104614073+GeemoCandama@users.noreply.github.com>
