aarifullin/neoneo-go
1
0
Fork 0
forked from TrueCloudLab/neoneo-go
Code Pull requests Activity

core: make some checks in TestMempoolAddRemoveConflicts non-critical

Browse source 
It will help to investigate test failures.
This commit is contained in:
Anna Shaleva 2020-11-12 15:14:32 +03:00
parent 54e6bcad12
commit a84e4c1e89
1 changed files with 25 additions and 25 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

50
pkg/core/mempool/mem_pool_test.go
View file

@ -344,9 +344,9 @@ 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)
@ -355,18 +355,18 @@ 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)
@ -375,40 +375,40 @@ 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)