TrueCloudLab/neoneo-go
7
0
Fork 2
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #1539 from nspcc-dev/core/fix_mempool_test

Browse source 
core: fix failing mempool test
This commit is contained in:
Roman Khimov 2020-11-12 15:48:28 +03:00 committed by GitHub
commit 9142906abe
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 31 additions and 29 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

60
pkg/core/mempool/mem_pool_test.go
View file

@ -354,13 +354,15 @@ func TestMempoolItemsOrder(t *testing.T) {
func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) { func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
capacity := 6 capacity := 6
mp := New(capacity) mp := New(capacity)
var fs = &FeerStub{ var (
p2pSigExt: true, fs = &FeerStub{p2pSigExt: true}
} nonce uint32 = 1
)
getConflictsTx := func(netFee int64, hashes ...util.Uint256) *transaction.Transaction { getConflictsTx := func(netFee int64, hashes ...util.Uint256) *transaction.Transaction {
tx := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0) tx := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0)
tx.NetworkFee = netFee 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.Signers = []transaction.Signer{{Account: util.Uint160{1, 2, 3}}}
tx.Attributes = make([]transaction.Attribute, len(hashes)) tx.Attributes = make([]transaction.Attribute, len(hashes))
for i, h := range 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 conflicts with mempooled tx1 and has larger netfee => tx1 should be replaced by tx3 (Step 2, positive)
tx3 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee+1, tx1.Hash()) tx3 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee+1, tx1.Hash())
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx3, fs)) require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx3, fs))
require.Equal(t, 1, mp.Count()) assert.Equal(t, 1, mp.Count())
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()]) 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 // 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) // 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 // tx2 can now safely be added because conflicting tx1 is not in mempool => we
// cannot check that tx2 is signed by tx1.Sender // cannot check that tx2 is signed by tx1.Sender
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx2, fs)) require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx2, fs))
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()]) 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) // mempooled tx4 conflicts with tx5, but tx4 has smaller netfee => tx4 should be replaced by tx5 (Step 1, positive)
tx5 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 1) tx5 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 1)
tx4 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx5.Hash()) tx4 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx5.Hash())
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx4, fs)) // unverified require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx4, fs)) // unverified
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx4.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx5.Hash()]) assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx4.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx5.Hash()])
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx5, fs)) require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx5, fs))
// tx5 does not conflict with anyone // 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 // multiple conflicts in attributes of single transaction
tx6 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee) tx6 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee)
@ -419,40 +421,40 @@ func TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts(t *testing.T) {
// need small network fee later // need small network fee later
tx9 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee-2, tx6.Hash(), tx7.Hash(), tx8.Hash()) tx9 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee-2, tx6.Hash(), tx7.Hash(), tx8.Hash())
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx9, fs)) require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx9, fs))
require.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()]) assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()])
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()]) assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()]) assert.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, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
// multiple conflicts in attributes of multiple transactions // multiple conflicts in attributes of multiple transactions
tx10 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx6.Hash()) tx10 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee, tx6.Hash())
tx11 := 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(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.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx11, fs)) // unverified, because tx6 is not in the pool
require.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 4, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash(), tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()]) assert.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()]) assert.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx7.Hash()])
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx9.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx8.Hash()]) assert.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, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
// reach capacity, remove less prioritised tx9 with its multiple conflicts // reach capacity, remove less prioritised tx9 with its multiple conflicts
require.Equal(t, capacity, len(mp.verifiedTxes)) require.Equal(t, capacity, len(mp.verifiedTxes))
tx12 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 2) tx12 := getConflictsTx(smallNetFee + 2)
require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx12, fs)) require.NoError(t, mp.Add(tx12, fs))
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash(), tx11.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()]) assert.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, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()])
// manually remove tx11 with its single conflict // manually remove tx11 with its single conflict
mp.Remove(tx11.Hash(), fs) mp.Remove(tx11.Hash(), fs)
require.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 2, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx10.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx6.Hash()]) 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 // manually remove last tx which conflicts with tx6 => mp.conflicts[tx6] should also be deleted
mp.Remove(tx10.Hash(), fs) mp.Remove(tx10.Hash(), fs)
require.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts)) assert.Equal(t, 1, len(mp.conflicts))
require.Equal(t, []util.Uint256{tx3.Hash(), tx2.Hash()}, mp.conflicts[tx1.Hash()]) 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 conflicts with tx2, but is not signed by tx2.Sender
tx13 := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0) tx13 := transaction.New(netmode.UnitTestNet, []byte{byte(opcode.PUSH1)}, 0)