mirror of
https://github.com/nspcc-dev/neo-go.git
synced 2024-11-26 19:42:23 +00:00
Merge pull request #1539 from nspcc-dev/core/fix_mempool_test
core: fix failing mempool test
This commit is contained in:
commit
9142906abe
1 changed files with 31 additions and 29 deletions
|
@ -354,13 +354,15 @@ func TestMempoolItemsOrder(t *testing.T) {
|
|||
func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
capacity := 6
|
||||
mp := New(capacity)
|
||||
var fs = &FeerStub{
|
||||
p2pSigExt: true,
|
||||
}
|
||||
var (
|
||||
fs = &FeerStub{p2pSigExt: true}
|
||||
nonce uint32 = 1
|
||||
)
|
||||
getConflictsTx := func(netFee int64, hashes ...util.Uint256) *transaction.Transaction {
|
||||
tx := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0)
|
||||
tx.NetworkFee = netFee
|
||||
tx.Nonce = uint32(random.Int(0, 1e4))
|
||||
tx.Nonce = nonce
|
||||
nonce++
|
||||
tx.Signers = []transaction.Signer{{Account: util.Uint160{1, 2, 3}}}
|
||||
tx.Attributes = make([]transaction.Attribute, len(hashes))
|
||||
for i, h := range hashes {
|
||||
|
@ -388,9 +390,9 @@ func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
|
|||
// tx3 conflicts with mempooled tx1 and has larger netfee => tx1 should be replaced by tx3 (Step 2, positive)
|
||||
tx3 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee+1, tx1.Hash())
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx3, fs))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 1, mp.Count())
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 1, mp.Count())
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// tx1 still does not conflicts with anyone, but tx3 is mempooled, conflicts with tx1
|
||||
// and has larger netfee => tx1 shouldn't be added again (Step 1, negative)
|
||||
|
@ -399,18 +401,18 @@ func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
|
|||
// tx2 can now safely be added because conflicting tx1 is not in mempool => we
|
||||
// cannot check that tx2 is signed by tx1.Sender
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx2, fs))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// mempooled tx4 conflicts with tx5, but tx4 has smaller netfee => tx4 should be replaced by tx5 (Step 1, positive)
|
||||
tx5 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 1)
|
||||
tx4 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx5.Hash())
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx4, fs)) // unverified
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx4.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx5.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx4.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx5.Hash()])
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx5, fs))
|
||||
// tx5 does not conflict with anyone
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
|
||||
// multiple conflicts in attributes of single transaction
|
||||
tx6 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee)
|
||||
|
@ -419,40 +421,40 @@ func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
|
|||
// need small network fee later
|
||||
tx9 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee-2, tx6.Hash(), tx7.Hash(), tx8.Hash())
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx9, fs))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// multiple conflicts in attributes of multiple transactions
|
||||
tx10 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx6.Hash())
|
||||
tx11 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx6.Hash())
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx10, fs)) // unverified, because tx6 is not in the pool
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx11, fs)) // unverified, because tx6 is not in the pool
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash(), tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash(), tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// reach capacity, remove less prioritised tx9 with its multiple conflicts
|
||||
require.Equal(t, capacity, len(mp.verifiedTxes))
|
||||
tx12 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 2)
|
||||
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx12, fs))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// manually remove tx11 with its single conflict
|
||||
mp.Remove(tx11.Hash(), fs)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// manually remove last tx which conflicts with tx6 => mp.conflicts[tx6] should also be deleted
|
||||
mp.Remove(tx10.Hash(), fs)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
|
||||
assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
|
||||
|
||||
// tx13 conflicts with tx2, but is not signed by tx2.Sender
|
||||
tx13 := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0)
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue