[Storehouse] 014 - Payloadless util create v6 checkpoint from v7 - #8595
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedThe saved review history does not include the base for the last reviewed commit. This saved history cannot establish the base for an incremental review. Comment You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Note Reviews pausedIt looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the Use the following commands to manage reviews:
Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 4 included reviews per hour; 3 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughChangesCheckpoint conversion
Priority: ➖ Normal Estimated code review effort: 4 (Complex) | ~45 minutes Change: Feature Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant checkpoint_convert_v6
participant ConvertCheckpointV7ToV6
participant buildPartitionPayloadPool
participant scanWALUpdates
participant convertSubTriesV7ToV6Concurrently
participant verifyRootHashesMatch
checkpoint_convert_v6->>ConvertCheckpointV7ToV6: start V7-to-V6 conversion
ConvertCheckpointV7ToV6->>buildPartitionPayloadPool: build payload sources
buildPartitionPayloadPool->>scanWALUpdates: read WAL update range
scanWALUpdates-->>buildPartitionPayloadPool: return updated payloads
ConvertCheckpointV7ToV6->>convertSubTriesV7ToV6Concurrently: convert subtrie parts
ConvertCheckpointV7ToV6->>verifyRootHashesMatch: compare reconstructed root hashes
Merge Risk: 🟡 Moderate · up to The conversion utility may delete a valid existing checkpoint on failure, and its validation tests may not verify the intended safeguards. These risks should be addressed before merging. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
9056749 to
415f130
Compare
415f130 to
8a646c8
Compare
8a646c8 to
2998458
Compare
2998458 to
58dc7cd
Compare
8b95f4c to
a6f81d0
Compare
Dependency Review✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues or OpenSSF Scorecard issues found.Scanned FilesNone |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
7037146 to
b9e1d99
Compare
b9e1d99 to
5f173b2
Compare
b541f80 to
b1baf1b
Compare
b1baf1b to
57a4bd3
Compare
57a4bd3 to
190c88c
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
190c88c to
0bc3664
Compare
0bc3664 to
959f80a
Compare
959f80a to
bdddac0
Compare
Co-authored-by: zhangchiqing <811374+zhangchiqing@users.noreply.github.com>
…allocated-leaf and missing-source tests
…dation error assertions
b7a71fd to
4f8a314
Compare
To be able to support mode switch especially switching from payloadless mode back to full node, we need to create a v6 checkpoint from a v7 checkpoint, so that we can simply converting the latest v7 checkpoint produced by a EN running in payloadless mode, and then restart in full node mode with the converted v6 checkpoint file. Since the wal file format didn't change, they can be reused by the full node to resume the execution.
This PR adds a util to create a v6 checkpoint from a v7 (payloadless) checkpoints and wal (write ahead logs) files.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests