[litep2p](https://github.com/altonen/litep2p) is a libp2p-compatible P2P
networking library. It supports all of the features of `rust-libp2p`
that are currently being utilized by Polkadot SDK.
Compared to `rust-libp2p`, `litep2p` has a quite different architecture
which is why the new `litep2p` network backend is only able to use a
little of the existing code in `sc-network`. The design has been mainly
influenced by how we'd wish to structure our networking-related code in
Polkadot SDK: independent higher-levels protocols directly communicating
with the network over links that support bidirectional backpressure. A
good example would be `NotificationHandle`/`RequestResponseHandle`
abstractions which allow, e.g., `SyncingEngine` to directly communicate
with peers to announce/request blocks.
I've tried running `polkadot --network-backend litep2p` with a few
different peer configurations and there is a noticeable reduction in
networking CPU usage. For high load (`--out-peers 200`), networking CPU
usage goes down from ~110% to ~30% (80 pp) and for normal load
(`--out-peers 40`), the usage goes down from ~55% to ~18% (37 pp).
These should not be taken as final numbers because:
a) there are still some low-hanging optimization fruits, such as
enabling [receive window
auto-tuning](https://github.com/libp2p/rust-yamux/pull/176), integrating
`Peerset` more closely with `litep2p` or improving memory usage of the
WebSocket transport
b) fixing bugs/instabilities that incorrectly cause `litep2p` to do less
work will increase the networking CPU usage
c) verification in a more diverse set of tests/conditions is needed
Nevertheless, these numbers should give an early estimate for CPU usage
of the new networking backend.
This PR consists of three separate changes:
* introduce a generic `PeerId` (wrapper around `Multihash`) so that we
don't have use `NetworkService::PeerId` in every part of the code that
uses a `PeerId`
* introduce `NetworkBackend` trait, implement it for the libp2p network
stack and make Polkadot SDK generic over `NetworkBackend`
* implement `NetworkBackend` for litep2p
The new library should be considered experimental which is why
`rust-libp2p` will remain as the default option for the time being. This
PR currently depends on the master branch of `litep2p` but I'll cut a
new release for the library once all review comments have been
addresses.
---------
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Vasile <alexandru.vasile@parity.io>
Co-authored-by: Dmitry Markin <dmitry@markin.tech>
Co-authored-by: Alexandru Vasile <60601340+lexnv@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexandru Vasile <alexandru.vasile@parity.io>
Working towards migrating the `parity-bridges-common` repo inside
`polkadot-sdk`. This PR upgrades some dependencies in order to align
them with the versions used in `parity-bridges-common`
Related to
https://github.com/paritytech/parity-bridges-common/issues/2538
**Update:** Pushed additional changes based on the review comments.
**This pull request fixes various spelling mistakes in this
repository.**
Most of the changes are contained in the first **3** commits:
- `Fix spelling mistakes in comments and docs`
- `Fix spelling mistakes in test names`
- `Fix spelling mistakes in error messages, panic messages, logs and
tracing`
Other source code spelling mistakes are separated into individual
commits for easier reviewing:
- `Fix the spelling of 'authority'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'REASONABLE_HEADERS_IN_JUSTIFICATION_ANCESTRY'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'prev_enqueud_messages'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'endpoint'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'children'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSiblingSovereignAccount'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSudoAccount'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'insufficient'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'PalletXcmExtrinsicsBenchmark'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'subtracted'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'CandidatePendingAvailability'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'exclusive'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'until'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'discriminator'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'nonexistent'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'subsystem'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'indices'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'committed'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'topology'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'response'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'beneficiary'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'formatted'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'UNKNOWN_PROOF_REQUEST'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'succeeded'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'reopened'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'proposer'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'InstantiationNonce'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'depositor'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'expiration'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'phantom'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'AggregatedKeyValue'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'randomness'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'defendant'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'AquaticMammal'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'transactions'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'PassingTracingSubscriber'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'TxSignaturePayload'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'versioning'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'descendant'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'overridden'`
- `Fix the spelling of 'network'`
Let me know if this structure is adequate.
**Note:** The usage of the words `Merkle`, `Merkelize`, `Merklization`,
`Merkelization`, `Merkleization`, is somewhat inconsistent but I left it
as it is.
~~**Note:** In some places the term `Receival` is used to refer to
message reception, IMO `Reception` is the correct word here, but I left
it as it is.~~
~~**Note:** In some places the term `Overlayed` is used instead of the
more acceptable version `Overlaid` but I also left it as it is.~~
~~**Note:** In some places the term `Applyable` is used instead of the
correct version `Applicable` but I also left it as it is.~~
**Note:** Some usage of British vs American english e.g. `judgement` vs
`judgment`, `initialise` vs `initialize`, `optimise` vs `optimize` etc.
are both present in different places, but I suppose that's
understandable given the number of contributors.
~~**Note:** There is a spelling mistake in `.github/CODEOWNERS` but it
triggers errors in CI when I make changes to it, so I left it as it
is.~~
Adds availability-write regression tests.
The results for the `availability-distribution` subsystem are volatile,
so I had to reduce the precision of the test.
Fixes https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3528
```rust
latency:
mean_latency_ms = 30 // common sense
std_dev = 2.0 // common sense
n_validators = 300 // max number of validators, from chain config
n_cores = 60 // 300/5
max_validators_per_core = 5 // default
min_pov_size = 5120 // max
max_pov_size = 5120 // max
peer_bandwidth = 44040192 // from the Parity's kusama validators
bandwidth = 44040192 // from the Parity's kusama validators
connectivity = 90 // we need to be connected to 90-95% of peers
```
### What's been done
- `subsystem-bench` has been split into two parts: a cli benchmark
runner and a library.
- The cli runner is quite simple. It just allows us to run `.yaml` based
test sequences. Now it should only be used to run benchmarks during
development.
- The library is used in the cli runner and in regression tests. Some
code is changed to make the library independent of the runner.
- Added first regression tests for availability read and write that
replicate existing test sequences.
### How we run regression tests
- Regression tests are simply rust integration tests without the
harnesses.
- They should only be compiled under the `subsystem-benchmarks` feature
to prevent them from running with other tests.
- This doesn't work when running tests with `nextest` in CI, so
additional filters have been added to the `nextest` runs.
- Each benchmark run takes a different time in the beginning, so we
"warm up" the tests until their CPU usage differs by only 1%.
- After the warm-up, we run the benchmarks a few more times and compare
the average with the exception using a precision.
### What is still wrong?
- I haven't managed to set up approval voting tests. The spread of their
results is too large and can't be narrowed down in a reasonable amount
of time in the warm-up phase.
- The tests start an unconfigurable prometheus endpoint inside, which
causes errors because they use the same 9999 port. I disable it with a
flag, but I think it's better to extract the endpoint launching outside
the test, as we already do with `valgrind` and `pyroscope`. But we still
use `prometheus` inside the tests.
### Future work
* https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3528
* https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3529
* https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3530
* https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3531
---------
Co-authored-by: Alexander Samusev <41779041+alvicsam@users.noreply.github.com>
Lifting some more dependencies to the workspace. Just using the
most-often updated ones for now.
It can be reproduced locally.
```sh
# First you can check if there would be semver incompatible bumps (looks good in this case):
$ zepter transpose dependency lift-to-workspace --ignore-errors syn quote thiserror "regex:^serde.*"
# Then apply the changes:
$ zepter transpose dependency lift-to-workspace --version-resolver=highest syn quote thiserror "regex:^serde.*" --fix
# And format the changes:
$ taplo format --config .config/taplo.toml
```
---------
Signed-off-by: Oliver Tale-Yazdi <oliver.tale-yazdi@parity.io>
Changes (partial https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/994):
- Set log to `0.4.20` everywhere
- Lift `log` to the workspace
Starting with a simpler one after seeing
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/2065 from @jsdw.
This sets the `default-features` to `false` in the root and then
overwrites that in each create to its original value. This is necessary
since otherwise the `default` features are additive and its impossible
to disable them in the crate again once they are enabled in the
workspace.
I am using a tool to do this, so its mostly a test to see that it works
as expected.
---------
Signed-off-by: Oliver Tale-Yazdi <oliver.tale-yazdi@parity.io>
Previously, it was only possible to retry the same request on a
different protocol name that had the exact same binary payloads.
Introduce a way of trying a different request on a different protocol if
the first one fails with Unsupported protocol.
This helps with adding new req-response versions in polkadot while
preserving compatibility with unupgraded nodes.
The way req-response protocols were bumped previously was that they were
bundled with some other notifications protocol upgrade, like for async
backing (but that is more complicated, especially if the feature does
not require any changes to a notifications protocol). Will be needed for
implementing https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/47
TODO:
- [x] add tests
- [x] add guidance docs in polkadot about req-response protocol
versioning
This tool makes it easy to run parachain consensus stress/performance
testing on your development machine or in CI.
## Motivation
The parachain consensus node implementation spans across many modules
which we call subsystems. Each subsystem is responsible for a small part
of logic of the parachain consensus pipeline, but in general the most
load and performance issues are localized in just a few core subsystems
like `availability-recovery`, `approval-voting` or
`dispute-coordinator`. In the absence of such a tool, we would run large
test nets to load/stress test these parts of the system. Setting up and
making sense of the amount of data produced by such a large test is very
expensive, hard to orchestrate and is a huge development time sink.
## PR contents
- CLI tool
- Data Availability Read test
- reusable mockups and components needed so far
- Documentation on how to get started
### Data Availability Read test
An overseer is built with using a real `availability-recovery` susbsytem
instance while dependent subsystems like `av-store`, `network-bridge`
and `runtime-api` are mocked. The network bridge will emulate all the
network peers and their answering to requests.
The test is going to be run for a number of blocks. For each block it
will generate send a “RecoverAvailableData” request for an arbitrary
number of candidates. We wait for the subsystem to respond to all
requests before moving to the next block.
At the same time we collect the usual subsystem metrics and task CPU
metrics and show some nice progress reports while running.
### Here is how the CLI looks like:
```
[2023-11-28T13:06:27Z INFO subsystem_bench::core::display] n_validators = 1000, n_cores = 20, pov_size = 5120 - 5120, error = 3, latency = Some(PeerLatency { min_latency: 1ms, max_latency: 100ms })
[2023-11-28T13:06:27Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Generating template candidate index=0 pov_size=5242880
[2023-11-28T13:06:27Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Created test environment.
[2023-11-28T13:06:27Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Pre-generating 60 candidates.
[2023-11-28T13:06:30Z INFO subsystem-bench::core] Initializing network emulation for 1000 peers.
[2023-11-28T13:06:30Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Current block 1/3
[2023-11-28T13:06:30Z INFO substrate_prometheus_endpoint] 〽️ Prometheus exporter started at 127.0.0.1:9999
[2023-11-28T13:06:30Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] 20 recoveries pending
[2023-11-28T13:06:37Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] Block time 6262ms
[2023-11-28T13:06:37Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Sleeping till end of block (0ms)
[2023-11-28T13:06:37Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Current block 2/3
[2023-11-28T13:06:37Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] 20 recoveries pending
[2023-11-28T13:06:43Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] Block time 6369ms
[2023-11-28T13:06:43Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Sleeping till end of block (0ms)
[2023-11-28T13:06:43Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Current block 3/3
[2023-11-28T13:06:43Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] 20 recoveries pending
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] Block time 6194ms
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem-bench::availability] Sleeping till end of block (0ms)
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] All blocks processed in 18829ms
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] Throughput: 102400 KiB/block
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability] Block time: 6276 ms
[2023-11-28T13:06:49Z INFO subsystem_bench::availability]
Total received from network: 415 MiB
Total sent to network: 724 KiB
Total subsystem CPU usage 24.00s
CPU usage per block 8.00s
Total test environment CPU usage 0.15s
CPU usage per block 0.05s
```
### Prometheus/Grafana stack in action
<img width="1246" alt="Screenshot 2023-11-28 at 15 11 10"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/54316454/eaa47422-4a5e-4a3a-aaef-14ca644c1574">
<img width="1246" alt="Screenshot 2023-11-28 at 15 12 01"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/54316454/237329d6-1710-4c27-8f67-5fb11d7f66ea">
<img width="1246" alt="Screenshot 2023-11-28 at 15 12 38"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/54316454/a07119e8-c9f1-4810-a1b3-f1b7b01cf357">
---------
Signed-off-by: Andrei Sandu <andrei-mihail@parity.io>
We currently use a bit of a hack in `.cargo/config` to make sure that
clippy isn't too annoying by specifying the list of lints.
There is now a stable way to define lints for a workspace. The only down
side is that every crate seems to have to opt into this so there's a
*few* files modified in this PR.
Dependencies:
- [x] PR that upgrades CI to use rust 1.74 is merged.
---------
Co-authored-by: joe petrowski <25483142+joepetrowski@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Branislav Kontur <bkontur@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Liam Aharon <liam.aharon@hotmail.com>
Collators were previously reencoding the available data and checking the
erasure root.
Replace that with just checking the PoV hash, which consumes much less
CPU and takes less time.
We also don't need to check the `PersistedValidationData` hash, as
collators don't use it.
Reason:
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/575#issuecomment-1806572230
After systematic chunks recovery is merged, collators will no longer do
any reed-solomon encoding/decoding, which has proven to be a great CPU
consumer.
Signed-off-by: alindima <alin@parity.io>
While investigating some db migrations that make the node startup fail,
I noticed that the node wasn't exiting and that the log file were
growing exponentially, until my whole system was freezing and that makes
it really hard to actually find why it was failing in the first place.
E.g:
```
ls -lh /tmp/zombie-01a04c2a2c0265d85f6440cf01c0f44a_-51319-uyggzuD4wEpV/bob.log
32,6G oct 27 11:16 /tmp/zombie-01a04c2a2c0265d85f6440cf01c0f44a_-51319-uyggzuD4wEpV/bob.log
```
This was happening because the following errors were being printed
continously without the subsystem main loop exiting:
From dispute-coordinator:
```
WARN tokio-runtime-worker parachain::dispute-coordinator: error=Subsystem(Generated(Context("Signal channel is terminated and empty.")))
```
From availability recovery:
```
Erasure task channel closed. Node shutting down ?
```
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gheorghe <alexandru.gheorghe@parity.io>
Refactors availability-recovery strategies to allow for easily adding
new hotpaths and failover mechanisms.
The new interface allows for chaining multiple `RecoveryStrategy`-es
together, to cleanly express the relationship between them and share
state and code where neccessary/possible:
This was done in order to aid in implementing new hotpaths like
[systematic chunks
recovery](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/598) and
[fetching from approval
checkers](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/575).
Thanks to this design, intermediate state can be shared between the
strategies. For example, if the systematic chunks recovery retrieved
less than the needed amount of chunks, pass them over to the next
FetchChunks strategy, which will only need to recover the remaining
number of chunks.
Draft example of how a systematic chunk recovery strategy would look:
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/commit/667d870bdf1470525d66c13929d5eac7249dd995
(notice how easy it was to add and reuse code)
Note that this PR doesn't itself add any new strategy, it should fully
preserve backwards compatiblity in terms of functionality. Follow-up PRs
to add new strategies will come.
* polkadot: propagate UnpinHandle to ActiveLeafUpdate
Also extract the leaf creation for tests
into a common function.
* dispute-coordinator: try pinned blocks for slashin
* apparently 1.72 is smarter than 1.70
* address nits
* rename fresh_leaf to new_leaf
* Happy New Year!
* Remove year entierly
Co-authored-by: Oliver Tale-Yazdi <oliver.tale-yazdi@parity.io>
* Remove years from copyright notice in the entire repo
---------
Co-authored-by: Oliver Tale-Yazdi <oliver.tale-yazdi@parity.io>
* rust 1.64 enables workspace properties
* add edition, repository and authors.
* of course, update the version in one place.
Co-authored-by: Andronik <write@reusable.software>
* Add clippy config and remove .cargo from gitignore
* first fixes
* Clippyfied
* Add clippy CI job
* comment out rusty-cachier
* minor
* fix ci
* remove DAG from check-dependent-project
* add DAG to clippy
Co-authored-by: alvicsam <alvicsam@gmail.com>
* westend: update transaction version
* polkadot: update transaction version
* kusama: update transaction version
* Bump spec_version to 9330
* bump versions to 0.9.33
Was seeing these warnings when running `cargo check --all`:
```
warning: for loop over an `Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
--> node/core/approval-voting/src/lib.rs:1147:21
|
1147 | for activated in update.activated {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(for_loops_over_fallibles)]` on by default
help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
|
1147 | while let Some(activated) = update.activated {
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
|
1147 | if let Some(activated) = update.activated {
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
```
My guess is that `activated` used to be a SmallVec or similar, as is
`deactivated`. It was changed to an `Option`, the `for` still compiled (it's
technically correct, just weird), and the compiler didn't catch it until now.
Aaro Altonen
