Handle racy edge cases in tx hash verification & handle nil latestBlock #10772
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I see that you haven't updated any README files. Would it make sense to do so? |
|
I see that you haven't updated any CHANGELOG files. Would it make sense to do so? |
infiloop2
changed the title
infiloop2
requested review from
RyanRHall,
FelixFan1992,
ferglor and
amirylm
ferglor
previously approved these changes
Sep 25, 2023
|
SonarQube Quality Gate
|
ferglor
approved these changes
Sep 25, 2023
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
on mumbai, i saw some flaky issues when rpc did not return the tx receipt for a log it returned a few ms ago (via log poller)
i realized that we can simplify the whole log verification when logBlockHash is same as the checkBlockHash. This would help avoid any racy conditions for new logs (which are checked on logBlock itself). For any recovery runs, the log block would be older than finality anyway
Somewhat independently I also saw that there were a couple of places where we could have tried to read from a nil pointer from
r.bs.latestBlock. Handle nil there