tendermint

8557 Commits

183 Branches

291 MiB

Tree: 68bd2116f0

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Erik Grinaker	670e9b427b	p2p: improve PeerManager prototype (#5936 ) This improves the prototype peer manager by: * Exporting `PeerManager`, making it accessible by e.g. reactors. * Replacing `Router.SubscribePeerUpdates()` with `PeerManager.Subscribe()`. * Tracking address/peer connection statistics, and retrying dial failures with exponential backoff. * Prioritizing peers, with persistent peers configuration. * Limiting simultaneous connections. * Evicting peers and upgrading to higher-priority peers. * Tracking peer heights, as a workaround for legacy shared peer state APIs. This is getting to a point where we need to determine precise semantics and implement tests, so we should figure out whether it's a reasonable abstraction that we want to use. The main questions are around the API model (i.e. synchronous method calls with the router polling the manager, vs. an event-driven model using channels, vs. the peer manager calling methods on the router to connect/disconnect peers), and who should have the responsibility of managing actual connections (currently the router, while the manager only tracks peer state).	4 years ago
Erik Grinaker	96215a06ed	p2p: add prototype peer lifecycle manager (#5882 ) This adds a prototype peer lifecycle manager, `peerManager`, which stores peer data in an internal `peerStore`. The overall idea here is to have methods for peer lifecycle events which exchange a very narrow subset of peer data, and to keep all of the peer metadata (i.e. the `peerInfo` struct) internal, to decouple this from the router and simplify concurrency control. See `peerManager` GoDoc for more information. The router is still responsible for actually dialing and accepting peer connections, and routing messages across them, but the peer manager is responsible for determining which peers to dial next, preventing multiple connections being established for the same peer (e.g. both inbound and outbound), and making sure we don't dial the same peer several times in parallel. Later it will also track retries and exponential backoff, as well as peer and address quality. It also assumes responsibility for peer updates subscriptions. It's a bit unclear to me whether we want the peer manager to take on the responsibility of actually dialing and accepting connections as well, or if it should only be tracking peer state for the router while the router is responsible for all transport concerns. Let's revisit this later.	4 years ago
Erik Grinaker	c61cd3fd05	p2p: add Router prototype (#5831 ) Early but functional prototype of the new `p2p.Router`, see its GoDoc comment for details on how it works. Expect much of this logic to change and improve as we evolve the new P2P stack. There is a simple test that sets up an in-memory network of four routers with reactors and passes messages between them, but otherwise no exhaustive tests since this is very much a work-in-progress.	4 years ago

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Erik Grinaker

670e9b427b

p2p: improve PeerManager prototype (#5936 )

This improves the prototype peer manager by:

* Exporting `PeerManager`, making it accessible by e.g. reactors.
* Replacing `Router.SubscribePeerUpdates()` with `PeerManager.Subscribe()`.
* Tracking address/peer connection statistics, and retrying dial failures with exponential backoff.
* Prioritizing peers, with persistent peers configuration.
* Limiting simultaneous connections.
* Evicting peers and upgrading to higher-priority peers.
* Tracking peer heights, as a workaround for legacy shared peer state APIs.

This is getting to a point where we need to determine precise semantics and implement tests, so we should figure out whether it's a reasonable abstraction that we want to use. The main questions are around the API model (i.e. synchronous method calls with the router polling the manager, vs. an event-driven model using channels, vs. the peer manager calling methods on the router to connect/disconnect peers), and who should have the responsibility of managing actual connections (currently the router, while the manager only tracks peer state).

4 years ago

Erik Grinaker

96215a06ed

p2p: add prototype peer lifecycle manager (#5882 )

This adds a prototype peer lifecycle manager, `peerManager`, which stores peer data in an internal `peerStore`. The overall idea here is to have methods for peer lifecycle events which exchange a very narrow subset of peer data, and to keep all of the peer metadata (i.e. the `peerInfo` struct) internal, to decouple this from the router and simplify concurrency control. See `peerManager` GoDoc for more information.

The router is still responsible for actually dialing and accepting peer connections, and routing messages across them, but the peer manager is responsible for determining which peers to dial next, preventing multiple connections being established for the same peer (e.g. both inbound and outbound), and making sure we don't dial the same peer several times in parallel. Later it will also track retries and exponential backoff, as well as peer and address quality. It also assumes responsibility for peer updates subscriptions.

It's a bit unclear to me whether we want the peer manager to take on the responsibility of actually dialing and accepting connections as well, or if it should only be tracking peer state for the router while the router is responsible for all transport concerns. Let's revisit this later.

4 years ago

Erik Grinaker

c61cd3fd05

p2p: add Router prototype (#5831 )

Early but functional prototype of the new `p2p.Router`, see its GoDoc comment for details on how it works. Expect much of this logic to change and improve as we evolve the new P2P stack.

There is a simple test that sets up an in-memory network of four routers with reactors and passes messages between them, but otherwise no exhaustive tests since this is very much a work-in-progress.

4 years ago

3 Commits (68bd2116f05f1a6f0974a55ec88ce30a94bbd383)