ETCM-443: Fix the KTable and the kademlia ID mapping getting out of sync #110
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I mistakenly assumed that
KBuckets.addadds a record whileKBuckets.touchonly updates the timestamp. InsteadTimeSet.touchis effectively just an alias for+. Not sure if that was the intention, because KBuckets.touch says it should move an item to the end of the list, andaddandtouchare now doing the same thing which is slightly confusing, but TimeSetSpec clearly assumes touching will add records.The PR changes
DiscoveryService.State.withTouchto only touch the peer if it's contained in the K-table, to avoid the situation where an unresponsive peer is removed, but an async touch (perhaps due to an eviction check) puts it back into the table but not the ID mapping.