Implement mempool and consensus block creation policies, almost the same as
SimplePolicy plugin for C# node provides with two caveats:
* HighPriorityTxType is not configured and hardcoded to ClaimType
* BlockedAccounts are not supported
Other than that it allows us to run successfuly as testnet CN, previously our
proposals were rejected because we were proposing blocks with oversized
transactions (that are rejected by PoolTx() now).
Mainnet and testnet configuration files are updated accordingly, but privnet
is left as is with no limits.
Configuration is currently attached to the Blockchain and so is the code that
does policying, it may be moved somewhere in the future, but it works for
now.
We can only add one block of the given height and we have two competing
goroutines to do that --- consensus and block queue. Whomever adds the block
first shouldn't trigger an error in another one.
Fix block relaying for blocks added via the block queue also, previously one
consensus-generated blocks were broadcasted.
Eliminate races between tx checks and adding them to the mempool, ensure the
chain doesn't change while we're working with the new tx. Ensure only one
block addition attempt could be in progress.
It can lead to some goroutine explosion, but supposedly it's better than
stalling other processing and eventually all of these goroutines should finish
their sends. Note that this doesn't change the behavior for RPC-relayed
transactions that are still waiting for the broadcast to finish ensuring
proper transaction distribution before returning the result to the client.
This one is designed to give more priority to direct nodes communication, that
is that their messaging would have more priority than generic broadcasts. It
should improve consensus process under TX pressure and allow to handle
pings in time (preventing disconnects).
They have the opposite order, height first and nonce second. It was done wrong
in 4e6ed902 and never fixed since. Fixes sending wrong peer state leading to
useless getheaders messages (and disconnects when the other side is lagging
behind).
We can have more than one connection attempt in progress and not yet completed
the handshake, so if there is a Version already received we should look it.
Our node was too pingy because of wrong timer setups (that divided timeout
Duration by time.Second), it also was wrong in its time calculations (using
UTC time to calculate intervals). At the same time missing block is a
server-wide problem, so it's better solved with server-wide protocol loop.
1) Make timeout a timeout, don't do magic ping counts.
2) Drop additional timer from the main peer's protocol loop, create it
dynamically and make it disconnect the peer.
3) Don't expose the ping counter to the outside, handle more logic inside the
Peer.
Relates to #430.
We don't and we won't have synchronized clocks in the network so the only
timestamp that we can compare our local time with is the one made
ourselves. What this ping mechanism is used for is to recover from missing the
block broadcast, thus it's appropriate for it to trigger after X seconds of
the local time since the last block received.
Relates to #430.
Two queues for high-priority and ordinary messages. Fixes#590. These queues
are deliberately made small to avoid buffer bloat problem, there is gonna be
another queueing layer above them to compensate for that. The queues are
designed to be synchronous in enqueueing, async capabilities are to be added
layer above later.
add pingInterval same as used in ref C# implementation with the same logic
add pingTimeout which is used to check whether pong received. If not -- drop the peer.
add pingLimit which is hardcoded to 4 in TCPPeer. It's limit for unsuccessful ping/pong calls (where pong wasn't received in pingTimeout interval)
It wasn't actually requesting transactions but rather sending an inventory
message telling everyone that we have them which is completely wrong and
easily leads to ChangeView that could be avoided.
Only request headers from the other peer if his height is bigger than
ours. Otherwise we routinely ask 0-height newcomers for some random headers
that they know nothing about.
This one is essential for the consensus nodes as otherwise they won't give out
the blocks they generate making their generation almost useless. It also makes
our networking part more complete.
We have a race between reader and writer goroutines for the same connection
that leads to handshake failures when reader is faster to read the incoming
version (and try to reply to it) than writer is to write our own Version:
WARN[0000] peer disconnected addr="172.200.0.4:20334" peerCount=5 reason="invalid handshake: tried to send VersionAck, but didn't send Version yet
Fix it by moving Version sending before the reader loop starts.
