before_code stringlengths 30 149k | reviewer_comment stringlengths 16 20.6k | after_code stringlengths 30 163k | diff_context stringlengths 0 22.4k | file_path stringlengths 6 155 | comment_line int64 0 26 | language stringclasses 19
values | quality_score float64 0.07 1 | comment_type stringclasses 9
values | comment_length int64 16 20.6k | before_lines int64 2 4.61k | after_lines int64 2 4.4k | is_negative bool 2
classes | pr_title stringlengths 7 140 | pr_number int64 18 61.2k | repo_name stringclasses 29
values | repo_stars int64 321 56k | repo_language stringclasses 14
values | reviewer_username stringclasses 378
values | author_username stringclasses 739
values | user stringlengths 361 200k | assistant stringlengths 16 20.6k | system stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_singleton", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_plain", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("use_optimization", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("reverse_spend_order", [True, False])
async def test_new_peak_ff_eviction(
spend_singleton: bool,... | This is an `int` not a `uint64` (already addressed). |
await mempool.new_peak(br, spent_coins)
invariant_check_mempool(mempool.mempool)
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_singleton", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_plain", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("use_optimization", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("reverse_s... | @@ -2453,7 +2444,7 @@ async def test_new_peak_ff_eviction(
bundle_add_info = await mempool_manager.add_spend_bundle(
bundle,
- make_test_conds(spend_ids=[(singleton_spend.coin, ELIGIBLE_FOR_FF), (TEST_COIN, 0)], cost=1000000),
+ make_test_conds(spend_ids=[(singleton_spend.coin, ELIGIBLE_FO... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | suggestion | 52 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE:
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_singleton", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("spend_plain", [True, False])
@pytest.... | This is an `int` not a `uint64` (already addressed). | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
"""
cost_saving = 0
unique_coin_spends: list[CoinSpend] = []
unique_additions: list[Coin] = []
# Map of coin ID to deduplication information
new_dedup_spends: dict[bytes32, DedupCoinSpend] = {}
# See if this item has coin spends that are eligible for deduplication... | `max_cost` is no longer needed (addressed already in addendum). | cost_saving = 0
unique_coin_spends: list[CoinSpend] = []
unique_additions: list[Coin] = []
# Map of coin ID to deduplication information
new_dedup_spends: dict[bytes32, DedupCoinSpend] = {}
# See if this item has coin spends that are eligible for deduplication
for... | @@ -180,30 +167,7 @@ def get_deduplication_info(
# solution we see from the relatively highest FPC item, to avoid
# severe performance and/or time-complexity impact
raise SkipDedup("Solution is different from what we're deduplicating on")
- # Let's calculate... | chia/full_node/eligible_coin_spends.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | suggestion | 63 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/eligible_coin_spends.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: """
cost_saving = 0
unique_coin_spends: list[CoinSpend] = []
unique_additions: list[Coin] = []
# Map of coin ID ... | `max_cost` is no longer needed (addressed already in addendum). | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if spend.seconds_relative is not None:
s = uint64(removal_coin_records[bytes32(spend.coin_id)].timestamp + spend.seconds_relative)
ret.assert_seconds = max(ret.assert_seconds, s)
if spend.before_height_relative is not None:
h = uint32(
removal_coin_re... | This is unrelated to the patch, it's a result of altering `add_spendbundle`'s failure path (addressed in the addendum). | if spend.seconds_relative is not None:
s = uint64(removal_coin_records[bytes32(spend.coin_id)].timestamp + spend.seconds_relative)
ret.assert_seconds = max(ret.assert_seconds, s)
if spend.before_height_relative is not None:
h = uint32(
removal_coin_re... | @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ def compute_assert_height(
@dataclass
class SpendBundleAddInfo:
- cost: Optional[uint64]
+ cost: uint64 | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | bug | 119 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: if spend.seconds_relative is not None:
s = uint64(removal_coin_records[bytes32(spend.coin_id)].timestamp + spend.seconds_relative)
... | This is unrelated to the patch, it's a result of altering `add_spendbundle`'s failure path (addressed in the addendum). | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
spend_name,
first_added_height,
get_coin_records,
get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash,
)
if err is None:
# No error, immediately add to mempool, after removing conflicting TXs.
assert item is not None
conflict = sel... | This is the unrelated change to `add_spend_bundle` that triggered several other changes in this patch (addressed already). | spend_name,
first_added_height,
get_coin_records,
get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash,
)
if err is None:
# No error, immediately add to mempool, after removing conflicting TXs.
assert item is not None
conflict = sel... | @@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ async def add_spend_bundle(
return SpendBundleAddInfo(item.cost, MempoolInclusionStatus.PENDING, [], err)
else:
# Cannot add to the mempool or pending pool.
- return SpendBundleAddInfo(None, MempoolInclusionStatus.FAILED, [], err)
+ return Spe... | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 122 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: spend_name,
first_added_height,
get_coin_records,
get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash,
)
... | This is the unrelated change to `add_spend_bundle` that triggered several other changes in this patch (addressed already). | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, uint64(coin.amount - actual_fee)])
sb = spend_bundle_from_conditions(conditions, coin)
... | The highest fee per cost we consider here belongs to the mempool item that contains the spend, not the spend with the highest fee per cost, right? | if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, uint64(coin.amount - actual_fee)])
sb = spend_bundle_from_conditions(conditions, coin)
... | @@ -3129,69 +3109,86 @@ def make_test_spendbundle(coin: Coin, *, fee: int = 0, with_higher_cost: bool =
if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
- conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | question | 146 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3... | The highest fee per cost we consider here belongs to the mempool item that contains the spend, not the spend with the highest fee per cost, right? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
def test_dedup_by_fee() -> None:
"""
We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spend with the highest
fee per cost, not based on which one would give the overall best fee per cost
"""
mempool = construct_mempool()
def add_spend_bundles(spend_bundles: list[SpendBundle]) -> None:
... | Considering we changed the test name and most of its body, can we parameterize old and new block generator calls and use them instead of `create_bundle_from_mempool_items` calls? |
@pytest.mark.parametrize("old", [True, False])
def test_dedup_by_fee(old: bool) -> None:
"""
We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spendbundle with the highest
fee per cost, not based on which one would give the overall best fee per cost
"""
mempool = construct_mempool()
def add_... | @@ -3129,69 +3109,86 @@ def make_test_spendbundle(coin: Coin, *, fee: int = 0, with_higher_cost: bool =
if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
- conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | question | 178 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE:
def test_dedup_by_fee() -> None:
"""
We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spend with the highest
fee per cost, not based o... | Considering we changed the test name and most of its body, can we parameterize old and new block generator calls and use them instead of `create_bundle_from_mempool_items` calls? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spend with the highest
fee per cost, not based on which one would give the overall best fee per cost
"""
mempool = construct_mempool()
def add_spend_bundles(spend_bundles: list[SpendBundle]) -> None:
sb = SpendBundle.aggregate(spend_bundles... | We keep calling `make_coin` using 0, 1 and 2 values, can we give these resulting coins names so that reading the test is easier? | """
We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spendbundle with the highest
fee per cost, not based on which one would give the overall best fee per cost
"""
mempool = construct_mempool()
def add_spend_bundles(spend_bundles: list[SpendBundle]) -> None:
sb = SpendBundle.aggregate... | @@ -3129,69 +3109,86 @@ def make_test_spendbundle(coin: Coin, *, fee: int = 0, with_higher_cost: bool =
if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
- conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | question | 128 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: We pick the solution to use for dedup based on the spend with the highest
fee per cost, not based on which one would give the overall best fee... | We keep calling `make_coin` using 0, 1 and 2 values, can we give these resulting coins names so that reading the test is easier? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# validate that dedup happens at all for sb_A
result = mempool.create_bundle_from_mempool_items(test_constants, uint32(0))
assert result is not None
agg, _ = result
# Make sure both items would be processed
assert [c.coin for c in agg.coin_spends] == [make_coin(0), make_coin(1), make_coin(2)]
... | Can we clarify what this number means? | add_spend_bundles([sb_A, sb_high_rate])
# Create a spend bundle, with a low fee, that spends the dedup coin using the same solution A
sb_low_rate = make_test_spendbundle(COIN_A2, fee=10)
add_spend_bundles([sb_A, sb_low_rate])
create_block = mempool.create_block_generator if old else mempool.create... | @@ -3129,69 +3109,86 @@ def make_test_spendbundle(coin: Coin, *, fee: int = 0, with_higher_cost: bool =
if with_higher_cost:
conditions.extend([[ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_PUZZLE_HASH, i] for i in range(3)])
actual_fee += 3
- conditions.append([ConditionOpcode.CREATE_COIN, IDENTITY_... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py | 26 | Python | 0.071 | question | 38 | 51 | 51 | false | use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings | 19,811 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py
PR Title: use per-puzzle cost to estimate DEDUP savings
BEFORE CODE: # validate that dedup happens at all for sb_A
result = mempool.create_bundle_from_mempool_items(test_constants, uint32(0))
assert result i... | Can we clarify what this number means? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
unf = UnfinishedBlock(
finished_ss,
block.reward_chain_block.get_unfinished(),
block.challenge_chain_sp_proof,
block.reward_chain_sp_proof,
block.foliage,
block.foliage_transaction_block,
block.tr... | ```suggestion
with pytest.raises(ValueError, matches="not found"):
await client.get_block(bytes32([1] * 32))
```
I think every test in your patch would benefit from this change | unf = UnfinishedBlock(
finished_ss,
block.reward_chain_block.get_unfinished(),
block.challenge_chain_sp_proof,
block.reward_chain_sp_proof,
block.foliage,
block.foliage_transaction_block,
block.tr... | @@ -88,8 +88,12 @@ async def test1(
peak_block = await client.get_block(state["peak"].header_hash)
assert peak_block == blocks[-1]
- assert (await client.get_block(bytes32([1] * 32))) is None
-
+ try:
+ await client.get_block(bytes32([1] * 32))
+ except ValueError as ... | chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py | 26 | Python | 1 | suggestion | 200 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE: unf = UnfinishedBlock(
finished_ss,
block.reward_chain_block.get_unfinished(),
block.cha... | ```suggestion
with pytest.raises(ValueError, matches="not found"):
await client.get_block(bytes32([1] * 32))
```
I think every test in your patch would benefit from this change | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
def coin_record_dict_backwards_compat(coin_record: dict[str, Any]) -> dict[str, Any]:
del coin_record["spent"]
return coin_record
class FullNodeRpcClient(RpcClient):
"""
Client to Chia RPC, connects to a local full node. Uses HTTP/JSON, and converts back from
JSON into native python objects befor... | this looks suspicious. what if you make a request to a node by hostname and you get "host not found". Is there a good reason to not pass through the `ResponseFailureError`?
This applies to the other places here too. |
def coin_record_dict_backwards_compat(coin_record: dict[str, Any]) -> dict[str, Any]:
del coin_record["spent"]
return coin_record
class FullNodeRpcClient(RpcClient):
"""
Client to Chia RPC, connects to a local full node. Uses HTTP/JSON, and converts back from
JSON into native python objects befor... | @@ -36,11 +36,13 @@ async def get_blockchain_state(self) -> dict[str, Any]:
response["blockchain_state"]["peak"] = BlockRecord.from_json_dict(response["blockchain_state"]["peak"])
return cast(dict[str, Any], response["blockchain_state"])
- async def get_block(self, header_hash: bytes32) -> Op... | chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_client.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | bug | 216 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_client.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE:
def coin_record_dict_backwards_compat(coin_record: dict[str, Any]) -> dict[str, Any]:
del coin_record["spent"]
return coin_record
class F... | this looks suspicious. what if you make a request to a node by hostname and you get "host not found". Is there a good reason to not pass through the `ResponseFailureError`?
This applies to the other places here too. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async def get_puzzle_and_solution(self, coin_id: bytes32, height: uint32) -> CoinSpend:
response = await self.fetch("get_puzzle_and_solution", {"coin_id": coin_id.hex(), "height": height})
return CoinSpend.from_json_dict(response["coin_solution"])
async def get_all_mempool_tx_ids(self) -> list[... | I think comparing strings is really error prone | converted: dict[bytes32, dict[str, Any]] = {}
for tx_id_hex, item in response["mempool_items"].items():
converted[bytes32.from_hexstr(tx_id_hex)] = item
return converted
async def get_mempool_item_by_tx_id(
self,
tx_id: bytes32,
include_pending: bool = Fa... | @@ -256,14 +247,16 @@ async def get_mempool_item_by_tx_id(
self,
tx_id: bytes32,
include_pending: bool = False,
- ) -> Optional[dict[str, Any]]:
+ ) -> dict[str, Any]:
try:
response = await self.fetch(
"get_mempool_item_by_tx_id", {"tx_id": tx_id.h... | chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_client.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | suggestion | 47 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_client.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE: async def get_puzzle_and_solution(self, coin_id: bytes32, height: uint32) -> CoinSpend:
response = await self.fetch("get_puzzle_and_solu... | I think comparing strings is really error prone | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert len(await client.get_coin_records_by_puzzle_hash(ph_receiver)) == 0
blocks = bt.get_consecutive_blocks(
2,
block_list_input=blocks,
guarantee_transaction_block=True,
farmer_reward_puzzle_hash=ph,
pool_reward_puzzle_hash=ph,
)
... | I'm pretty sure this line won't be executed. I think it would need its own `with pytest.raises(...):` context | assert len(await client.get_coin_records_by_puzzle_hash(ph_receiver)) == 0
blocks = bt.get_consecutive_blocks(
2,
block_list_input=blocks,
guarantee_transaction_block=True,
farmer_reward_puzzle_hash=ph,
pool_reward_puzzle_hash=ph,
)
... | @@ -150,8 +150,9 @@ async def test1(
assert len(await client.get_all_mempool_items()) == 0
assert len(await client.get_all_mempool_tx_ids()) == 0
- assert (await client.get_mempool_item_by_tx_id(spend_bundle.name())) is None
- assert (await client.get_mempool_item_by_tx_id(spend_bundle... | chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 110 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE: assert len(await client.get_coin_records_by_puzzle_hash(ph_receiver)) == 0
blocks = bt.get_consecutive_blocks(
2,
... | I'm pretty sure this line won't be executed. I think it would need its own `with pytest.raises(...):` context | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
full_node_api_2 = full_node_service_2._api
server_1 = full_node_api_1.full_node.server
server_2 = full_node_api_2.full_node.server
config = bt.config
self_hostname = config["self_hostname"]
peer = await connect_and_get_peer(server_1, server_2, self_hostname)
assert full_node_service_1.rpc_... | same comment here. I don't think this will be exercised | full_node_api_1 = full_node_service_1._api
full_node_api_2 = full_node_service_2._api
server_1 = full_node_api_1.full_node.server
server_2 = full_node_api_2.full_node.server
config = bt.config
self_hostname = config["self_hostname"]
peer = await connect_and_get_peer(server_1, server_2, sel... | @@ -454,17 +456,14 @@ async def test_signage_points(
full_node_service_1.config,
) as client:
# Only provide one
- res = await client.get_recent_signage_point_or_eos(None, None)
- assert res is None
- res = await client.get_recent_signage_point_or_eos(std_hash(b"0"), std_hash... | chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | suggestion | 55 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/test_full_node_rpc.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE: full_node_api_2 = full_node_service_2._api
server_1 = full_node_api_1.full_node.server
server_2 = full_node_api_2.full_node.server
... | same comment here. I don't think this will be exercised | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if start_height is None:
start_height = 0
asyncio.run(
cli_async(
root_path=root_path_path,
rpc_port=rpc_port,
spends_with_conditions=spends_with_conditions,
block_spends=block_spends,
additions_and_removals=additions_and_removals,
... | an option, fyi
```suggestion
except Exception:
print(f"ERROR: [{height}] get_block_spends_with_conditions returned invalid result")
raise
``` | if start_height is None:
start_height = 0
asyncio.run(
cli_async(
root_path=root_path_path,
rpc_port=rpc_port,
spends_with_conditions=spends_with_conditions,
block_spends=block_spends,
additions_and_removals=additions_and_removals,
... | @@ -153,29 +153,35 @@ async def node_spends_with_conditions(
block_hash: bytes32,
height: int,
) -> None:
- result = await node_client.get_block_spends_with_conditions(block_hash)
- if result is None:
+ try:
+ await node_client.get_block_spends_with_conditions(block_hash)
+ except Exceptio... | tools/validate_rpcs.py | 26 | Python | 0.857 | suggestion | 168 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC | 19,825 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | jack60612 | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: tools/validate_rpcs.py
PR Title: CHIA-3396 Remove Exception Catching from node RPC
BEFORE CODE: if start_height is None:
start_height = 0
asyncio.run(
cli_async(
root_path=root_path_path,
rpc_port=rpc_port,
... | an option, fyi
```suggestion
except Exception:
print(f"ERROR: [{height}] get_block_spends_with_conditions returned invalid result")
raise
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_datacases(name="test_confirmation", true="confirm blobs", false="don't confirm blobs")
async def test_unconfirmed_keys_values(
data_store: DataStore,
... | https://docs.python.org/3.13/library/random.html#random.randbytes
> _Added in version 3.9._
we're finally allowed to use `.randbytes()`! `:]` :tada:
```suggestion
key = seeded_random.randbytes(size)
value = seeded_random.randbytes(size)
```
this reminded me to make https://github... |
terminal_nodes = await data_store.get_keys_values(store_id=store_id)
retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_datacases(name="success", false="invalid file", true="valid file")
async def tes... | @@ -2258,3 +2258,54 @@ async def test_get_keys_values_both_disk_and_db(
retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@boolean_datacases(name="test_confirmation", true="confirm blobs", false="don't conf... | chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.857 | suggestion | 364 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_... | https://docs.python.org/3.13/library/random.html#random.randbytes
> _Added in version 3.9._
we're finally allowed to use `.randbytes()`! `:]` :tada:
```suggestion
key = seeded_random.randbytes(size)
value = seeded_random.randbytes(size)
```
this reminded me to make https://github... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
await data_store.write_tree_to_file(root, root_hash, store_id, False, writer)
log.info(f"Successfully written full tree filename {filename_full_tree}.")
else:
log.info(f"Skipping full file generation for {existing_generation}")
... | would this be safer before the rollback? either now or in general against future refactors. | await data_store.write_tree_to_file(root, root_hash, store_id, False, writer)
log.info(f"Successfully written full tree filename {filename_full_tree}.")
else:
log.info(f"Skipping full file generation for {existing_generation}")
... | @@ -257,6 +257,7 @@ async def insert_from_delta_file(
# Don't penalize this server if we didn't download the file from it.
await data_store.server_misses_file(store_id, server_info, timestamp)
await data_store.rollback_to_generation(store_id, existing_generation - 1)
+ ... | chia/data_layer/download_data.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | refactor | 92 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/download_data.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: await data_store.write_tree_to_file(root, root_hash, store_id, False, writer)
log.info(f"Successfully written full tree filename {filena... | would this be safer before the rollback? either now or in general against future refactors. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
)
from chia.util.batches import to_batches
from chia.util.db_wrapper import SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER, DBWrapper2
from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.lru_cache import LRUCache
log = logging.getLogger(__name__)
# TODO: review exceptions for values that shouldn't be displayed
# TODO: pi... | ```suggestion
unconfirmed_keys_values: defaultdict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] = field(default_factory=functools.partial(defaultdict, list))
``` | )
from chia.util.batches import to_batches
from chia.util.db_wrapper import SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER, DBWrapper2
from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.lru_cache import LRUCache
log = logging.getLogger(__name__)
# TODO: review exceptions for values that shouldn't be displayed
# TODO: pi... | @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ class DataStore:
recent_merkle_blobs: LRUCache[bytes32, MerkleBlob]
merkle_blobs_path: Path
key_value_blobs_path: Path
+ unconfirmed_keys_values: defaultdict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 146 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: )
from chia.util.batches import to_batches
from chia.util.db_wrapper import SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER, DBWrapper2
from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.l... | ```suggestion
unconfirmed_keys_values: defaultdict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] = field(default_factory=functools.partial(defaultdict, list))
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash)
except sqlite3.IntegrityError as e:
if "UNIQUE constraint failed" in str(e):
kv_id = await self.get_kvid(blob, store_id)
if kv_id is None:
raise Exception("Internal error") fr... | i... think in this case it's reasonable to attempt to continue after logging regardless of the failure. but always good to question ideas like this...
```suggestion
with log_exceptions(log=log, consume=True):
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
... |
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash)
# TOD... | @@ -659,11 +674,23 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
+ async def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
+ for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_value... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.929 | bug | 509 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash)
except sqlite3.IntegrityError as e:
if "UNIQUE constraint failed" in str(e):
... | i... think in this case it's reasonable to attempt to continue after logging regardless of the failure. but always good to question ideas like this...
```suggestion
with log_exceptions(log=log, consume=True):
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
for _ in range(num_keys):
use_file = seeded_random.choice([True, False])
assert tmp_data_store.prefer_db_kv_blob_length > 7
size = tmp_data_store.prefer_db_kv_blob_length + 1 if use_file else 8
key = bytes(seeded_random.getrandbits(8) for _ in range(size))
... | not sure why ruff or mypy aren't complaining
```suggestion
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) == 0
``` | await tmp_data_store.create_tree(store_id, status=Status.COMMITTED)
changelist: list[dict[str, Any]] = []
for _ in range(num_keys):
use_file = seeded_random.choice([True, False])
assert tmp_data_store.prefer_db_kv_blob_length > 7
size = tmp_data_store.prefer_d... | @@ -2258,3 +2258,80 @@ async def test_get_keys_values_both_disk_and_db(
retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@boolean_datacases(name="success", false="invalid file", true="valid file")
+async d... | chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 147 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: for _ in range(num_keys):
use_file = seeded_random.choice([True, False])
assert tmp_data_store.prefer_db_kv_blob_length > 7
... | not sure why ruff or mypy aren't complaining
```suggestion
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) == 0
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
store_id=store_id,
existing_generation=0,
target_generation=1,
root_hashes=[root_hash],
server_info=sinfo,
client_foldername=files_path,
timeout=aiohttp.ClientTimeout(total=15, sock_connect=5),
log=log,
proxy_url="",
downloader=None,
)
... | ```suggestion
if success:
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) > 0
else:
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) == 0
``` | is_success = await insert_from_delta_file(
data_store=data_store,
store_id=store_id,
existing_generation=0,
target_generation=1,
root_hashes=[root_hash],
server_info=sinfo,
client_foldername=files_path,
timeout=aiohttp.ClientTimeout(total=15, sock_conn... | @@ -2258,3 +2258,80 @@ async def test_get_keys_values_both_disk_and_db(
retrieved_keys_values = {node.key: node.value for node in terminal_nodes}
assert retrieved_keys_values == inserted_keys_values
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@boolean_datacases(name="success", false="invalid file", true="valid file")
+async d... | chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.786 | suggestion | 215 | 27 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/data_layer/test_data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: store_id=store_id,
existing_generation=0,
target_generation=1,
root_hashes=[root_hash],
server_info=sinfo,
client_fold... | ```suggestion
if success:
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) > 0
else:
assert sum(1 for path in keys_value_path.rglob("*") if path.is_file()) == 0
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
found = await anyio.to_thread.run_sync(
delta_reader.collect_and_return_from_merkle_blobs,
jobs,
missing_hashes,
)
async with self.db_wrapper.writer() as writer:
await writer.executemany(
"""
... | in most places we only pass a writer when it is critical for performance. that doesn't seem like it would be the case here. the nesting should just naturally work. is there another reason to be passing the writer in? | jobs,
missing_hashes,
)
async with self.db_wrapper.writer() as writer:
await writer.executemany(
"""
INSERT
OR IGNORE INTO nodes(store_id, hash, root_hash, generation, idx)
... | @@ -340,49 +349,48 @@ async def build_cache_and_collect_missing_hashes(
log.info(f"Missing hashes: added old hashes from generation {current_generation}")
async def read_from_file(
- self, filename: Path, store_id: bytes32
+ self, filename: Path, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Co... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | performance | 219 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE:
found = await anyio.to_thread.run_sync(
delta_reader.collect_and_return_from_merkle_blobs,
jobs,
missing_hashes,
... | in most places we only pass a writer when it is critical for performance. that doesn't seem like it would be the case here. the nesting should just naturally work. is there another reason to be passing the writer in? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async def get_terminal_node(self, kid: KeyId, vid: ValueId, store_id: bytes32) -> TerminalNode:
key = await self.get_blob_from_kvid(kid.raw, store_id)
value = await self.get_blob_from_kvid(vid.raw, store_id)
if key is None or value is None:
raise Exception("Cannot find the key/va... | what do you think of locating this down below right before the path is actually written? | value = await self.get_blob_from_kvid(vid.raw, store_id)
if key is None or value is None:
raise Exception("Cannot find the key/value pair")
return TerminalNode(hash=leaf_hash(key, value), key=key, value=value)
async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aio... | @@ -641,6 +649,8 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
store_id,
),
)
+ if use_file:
+ self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash) | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | question | 88 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: async def get_terminal_node(self, kid: KeyId, vid: ValueId, store_id: bytes32) -> TerminalNode:
key = await self.get_blob_from_kvid(kid.raw, store_id)
value = awai... | what do you think of locating this down below right before the path is actually written? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
# TODO: consider file-system based locking of either the file or the store directory
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
fo... | my first thought is to cleanup in all cases. `except Exception:` will not cleanup on async cancellation nor on ctrl+c or whatever. db wrapper uses `except:` to trigger a rollback.
```suggestion
except:
``` | return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id]:
with log_exceptions(log=log, consume=True):
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
... | @@ -659,6 +669,32 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
+ def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
+ for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 1 | suggestion | 220 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
# TODO: consider file-system based locking of either the file or the store directory
path.write_byte... | my first thought is to cleanup in all cases. `except Exception:` will not cleanup on async cancellation nor on ctrl+c or whatever. db wrapper uses `except:` to trigger a rollback.
```suggestion
except:
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if "UNIQUE constraint failed" in str(e):
kv_id = await self.get_kvid(blob, store_id)
if kv_id is None:
raise Exception("Internal error") from e
return kv_id
raise
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal e... | ```suggestion
del self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id]
``` | return kv_id
raise
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
self.unconfirmed_keys_valu... | @@ -659,6 +669,32 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
+ def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
+ for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 70 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: if "UNIQUE constraint failed" in str(e):
kv_id = await self.get_kvid(blob, store_id)
if kv_id is None:
raise Exception(... | ```suggestion
del self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id]
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
raise Exception("Internal error") from e
return kv_id
raise
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parent... | ```suggestion
del self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id]
``` |
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash)
# TOD... | @@ -659,6 +669,32 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
+ def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
+ for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 70 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: raise Exception("Internal error") from e
return kv_id
raise
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
... | ```suggestion
del self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id]
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
# TODO: consider file-system based locking of either the file or the store... | ```suggestion
d = {}
if self.unconfirmed_keys_values.setdefault(store_id, d) is not d:
```
or, a bit less fancy pants...
```suggestion
if store_id not in self.unconfirmed_keys_values:
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id] = {}
else:
``` | path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id].append(blob_hash)
# TODO: consider file-system based locking of either the file or the store directory
... | @@ -659,6 +669,32 @@ async def add_kvid(self, blob: bytes, store_id: bytes32, writer: aiosqlite.Conne
path.write_bytes(zstd.compress(blob))
return KeyOrValueId(row[0])
+ def delete_unconfirmed_kvids(self, store_id: bytes32) -> None:
+ for blob_hash in self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.786 | suggestion | 294 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE:
if row is None:
raise Exception("Internal error")
if use_file:
path = self.get_key_value_path(store_id=store_id, blob_hash=blob_hash)
... | ```suggestion
d = {}
if self.unconfirmed_keys_values.setdefault(store_id, d) is not d:
```
or, a bit less fancy pants...
```suggestion
if store_id not in self.unconfirmed_keys_values:
self.unconfirmed_keys_values[store_id] = {}
else:
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
from chia.util.db_wrapper import SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER, DBWrapper2
from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.lru_cache import LRUCache
log = logging.getLogger(__name__)
# TODO: review exceptions for values that shouldn't be displayed
# TODO: pick exception types other than Exception
Ke... | ```suggestion
unconfirmed_keys_values: dict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] = field(default_factory=dict)
``` | from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.lru_cache import LRUCache
log = logging.getLogger(__name__)
# TODO: review exceptions for values that shouldn't be displayed
# TODO: pick exception types other than Exception
KeyOrValueId = int64
default_prefer_file_kv_blob_length: int = 4096
@da... | @@ -82,6 +83,9 @@ class DataStore:
recent_merkle_blobs: LRUCache[bytes32, MerkleBlob]
merkle_blobs_path: Path
key_value_blobs_path: Path
+ unconfirmed_keys_values: defaultdict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] = field(
+ default_factory=functools.partial(defaultdict, list)
+ ) | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 107 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: from chia.util.db_wrapper import SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER, DBWrapper2
from chia.util.log_exceptions import log_exceptions
from chia.util.lru_cache import LRUCache
log = logging.get... | ```suggestion
unconfirmed_keys_values: dict[bytes32, list[bytes32]] = field(default_factory=dict)
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
delta_reader.collect_and_return_from_merkle_blobs,
jobs,
missing_hashes,
)
async with self.db_wrapper.writer() as writer:
await writer.executemany(
"""
INSERT
OR IGNORE INT... | is there a reason for this to move from below up to here? | delta_reader.collect_and_return_from_merkle_blobs,
jobs,
missing_hashes,
)
async with self.db_wrapper.writer() as writer:
await writer.executemany(
"""
INSERT
OR IGNORE INT... | @@ -342,11 +348,11 @@ async def build_cache_and_collect_missing_hashes(
async def read_from_file(
self, filename: Path, store_id: bytes32
) -> tuple[dict[bytes32, tuple[bytes32, bytes32]], dict[bytes32, tuple[KeyId, ValueId]]]:
- internal_nodes: dict[bytes32, tuple[bytes32, bytes32]] = {}
- ... | chia/data_layer/data_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | question | 57 | 51 | 51 | false | Cleanup keys/values db. | 19,829 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | fchirica | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/data_store.py
PR Title: Cleanup keys/values db.
BEFORE CODE: delta_reader.collect_and_return_from_merkle_blobs,
jobs,
missing_hashes,
)
async with self.db_wrapper.writer() ... | is there a reason for this to move from below up to here? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if num == 0:
return None
parallel_read: bool = config["harvester"].get("parallel_read", True)
v = Verifier()
log.info(f"Loading plots in config.yaml using plot_manager loading code (parallel read: {parallel_read})\n")
# Prompts interactively if the keyring is protected by a master passphra... | I wonder why mypy missed this earlier | if num == 0:
return None
parallel_read: bool = config["harvester"].get("parallel_read", True)
v = Verifier()
log.info(f"Loading plots in config.yaml using plot_manager loading code (parallel read: {parallel_read})\n")
# Prompts interactively if the keyring is protected by a master passphra... | @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ def check_plots(
log.info("")
log.info("")
log.info(f"Starting to test each plot with {num} challenges each\n")
- total_good_plots: Counter[str] = Counter()
+ total_good_plots: Counter[uint8] = Counter() | chia/plotting/check_plots.py | 26 | Python | 0.071 | suggestion | 37 | 51 | 51 | false | Plotmanager v2 | 19,832 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/plotting/check_plots.py
PR Title: Plotmanager v2
BEFORE CODE: if num == 0:
return None
parallel_read: bool = config["harvester"].get("parallel_read", True)
v = Verifier()
log.info(f"Loading plots in config.yaml using plot_manager... | I wonder why mypy missed this earlier | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
config["harvester"]["decompressor_thread_count"] = decompressor_thread_count
if recursive_plot_scan is not None:
config["harvester"]["recursive_plot_scan"] = recursive_plot_scan
if refresh_parameter is not None:
config["harvester"]["plots_refresh_parameter"] = refresh... | I think this is quite slow. maybe that's fine for now. We'll probably have 6 months for optimizations between the 3.0 release and activation. An alternative would be to use the glob pattern `*.plot?` | config["harvester"]["parallel_decompressor_count"] = parallel_decompressor_count
if decompressor_thread_count is not None:
config["harvester"]["decompressor_thread_count"] = decompressor_thread_count
if recursive_plot_scan is not None:
config["harvester"]["recursive_p... | @@ -233,16 +235,22 @@ def get_filenames(directory: Path, recursive: bool, follow_links: bool) -> list[
if follow_links and recursive:
import glob
- files = glob.glob(str(directory / "**" / "*.plot"), recursive=True)
- for file in files:
+ v1_file_strs = glob.glob... | chia/plotting/util.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | performance | 199 | 51 | 51 | false | Plotmanager v2 | 19,832 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/plotting/util.py
PR Title: Plotmanager v2
BEFORE CODE: config["harvester"]["decompressor_thread_count"] = decompressor_thread_count
if recursive_plot_scan is not None:
config["harvester"]["recursive_plot_scan"] = recursive_... | I think this is quite slow. maybe that's fine for now. We'll probably have 6 months for optimizations between the 3.0 release and activation. An alternative would be to use the glob pattern `*.plot?` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
NPM_GLOBAL="${SCRIPT_DIR}/build_scripts/npm_global"
# install-gui.sh can be executed
echo "cd ${NPM_GLOBAL}"
cd "${NPM_GLOBAL}"
if [ "$NPM_VERSION" -lt "6" ]; then
# Ubuntu image of Amazon ec2 instance surprisingly uses nodejs@3.5.2
# which doesn't support `npm ci` as of 27th Jan, 2022
... | This line should be updated to only support `npm >= 10` | NPM_GLOBAL="${SCRIPT_DIR}/build_scripts/npm_global"
# install-gui.sh can be executed
echo "cd ${NPM_GLOBAL}"
cd "${NPM_GLOBAL}"
if [ "$NPM_VERSION" -lt "6" ]; then
# Ubuntu image of Amazon ec2 instance surprisingly uses nodejs@3.5.2
# which doesn't support `npm ci` as of 27th Jan, 2022
... | @@ -70,13 +70,13 @@ do_install_npm_locally() {
export N_PREFIX=${SCRIPT_DIR}/.n
PATH="${N_PREFIX}/bin:$(npm prefix)/node_modules/.bin:${PATH}"
export PATH
- # `n 18` here installs nodejs@18 under $N_PREFIX directory
- echo "n 18"
- n 18
+ # `n 20` here installs nodejs@20 under $N_PREFIX direc... | install-gui.sh | 26 | Shell | 0.429 | suggestion | 55 | 51 | 51 | false | Change minimium node version to 20 and npm version to 10 | 19,845 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | ChiaMineJP | emlowe | Review this pull request change.
Language: Shell
File: install-gui.sh
PR Title: Change minimium node version to 20 and npm version to 10
BEFORE CODE: NPM_GLOBAL="${SCRIPT_DIR}/build_scripts/npm_global"
# install-gui.sh can be executed
echo "cd ${NPM_GLOBAL}"
cd "${NPM_GLOBAL}"
if [ "$NPM_VERSION... | This line should be updated to only support `npm >= 10` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
fi
if [ "$(id -u)" = 0 ]; then
echo "The Chia Blockchain GUI can not be installed or run by the root user."
exit 1
fi
# Allows overriding the branch or commit to build in chia-blockchain-gui
SUBMODULE_BRANCH=$1
nodejs_is_installed() {
if ! npm version >/dev/null 2>&1; then
return 1
fi
return 0
}
do_in... | This should be `if [ "$NPM_VERSION" -lt "10" ]; then` | fi
if [ "$(id -u)" = 0 ]; then
echo "The Chia Blockchain GUI can not be installed or run by the root user."
exit 1
fi
# Allows overriding the branch or commit to build in chia-blockchain-gui
SUBMODULE_BRANCH=$1
nodejs_is_installed() {
if ! npm version >/dev/null 2>&1; then
return 1
fi
return 0
}
do_in... | @@ -40,17 +40,17 @@ do_install_npm_locally() {
NODEJS_VERSION="$(node -v | cut -d'.' -f 1 | sed -e 's/^v//')"
NPM_VERSION="$(npm -v | cut -d'.' -f 1)"
- if [ "$NODEJS_VERSION" -lt "18" ] || [ "$NPM_VERSION" -lt "9" ]; then
- if [ "$NODEJS_VERSION" -lt "18" ]; then
- echo "Current NodeJS version($(node ... | install-gui.sh | 26 | Shell | 0.429 | suggestion | 53 | 51 | 51 | false | Change minimium node version to 20 and npm version to 10 | 19,845 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | ChiaMineJP | emlowe | Review this pull request change.
Language: Shell
File: install-gui.sh
PR Title: Change minimium node version to 20 and npm version to 10
BEFORE CODE: fi
if [ "$(id -u)" = 0 ]; then
echo "The Chia Blockchain GUI can not be installed or run by the root user."
exit 1
fi
# Allows overriding the branch or commit t... | This should be `if [ "$NPM_VERSION" -lt "10" ]; then` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
"pending_coin_removal_count": -2,
}
},
),
WalletStateTransition(
pre_block_balance_updates={},
post_block_balance_updates={},
),
]
)
... | i think? maybe?
```suggestion
assert "0x" + b"Test".hex() in txs["transactions"][0]["memos"].values()
``` | "pending_coin_removal_count": -2,
}
},
),
WalletStateTransition(
pre_block_balance_updates={},
post_block_balance_updates={},
),
]
)
... | @@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ async def test_wallet_clawback_sent_self(self, wallet_environments: WalletTestFr
assert txs["transactions"][0]["confirmed"]
assert txs["transactions"][1]["confirmed"]
assert txs["transactions"][0]["memos"] != txs["transactions"][1]["memos"]
- assert next(iter(txs["t... | chia/_tests/wallet/test_wallet.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 119 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3418] Change `TransactionRecord` to use dict instead of list of tuples for memos | 19,846 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/wallet/test_wallet.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3418] Change `TransactionRecord` to use dict instead of list of tuples for memos
BEFORE CODE: "pending_coin_removal_count": -2,
}
},
... | i think? maybe?
```suggestion
assert "0x" + b"Test".hex() in txs["transactions"][0]["memos"].values()
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
def recurse_jsonify(
d: Any, next_recursion_step: Optional[Callable[[Any, Any], Any]] = None, **next_recursion_env: Any
) -> Any:
"""
Makes bytes objects into strings with 0x, and makes large ints into strings.
"""
if next_recursion_step is None:
next_recursion_step = recurse_jsonify
i... | we need to recurse on the key? i thought json could only have string keys in objects. |
def recurse_jsonify(
d: Any, next_recursion_step: Optional[Callable[[Any, Any], Any]] = None, **next_recursion_env: Any
) -> Any:
"""
Makes bytes objects into strings with 0x, and makes large ints into strings.
"""
if next_recursion_step is None:
next_recursion_step = recurse_jsonify
i... | @@ -303,7 +303,9 @@ def recurse_jsonify(
elif isinstance(d, dict):
new_dict = {}
for name, val in d.items():
- new_dict[name] = next_recursion_step(val, None, **next_recursion_env)
+ new_dict[next_recursion_step(name, None, **next_recursion_env)] = next_recursion_step( | chia/util/streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | suggestion | 86 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3418] Change `TransactionRecord` to use dict instead of list of tuples for memos | 19,846 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/util/streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3418] Change `TransactionRecord` to use dict instead of list of tuples for memos
BEFORE CODE:
def recurse_jsonify(
d: Any, next_recursion_step: Optional[Callable[[Any, Any], Any]] = None, **next_recursion_env: Any
... | we need to recurse on the key? i thought json could only have string keys in objects. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
rows = await conn.execute_fetchall(
"SELECT confirmed_index, spent_index, coinbase, puzzle_hash, "
"coin_parent, amount, timestamp, coin_name FROM coin_record WHERE confirmed_index>?",
(block_index,),
)
for row in rows:
... | ```suggestion
record = CoinRecord(coin, row[0], uint32(0), row[2] != 0, row[6])
``` | """
Note that block_index can be negative, in which case everything is rolled back
Returns a map of coin ID to coin record for modified items.
"""
coin_changes: dict[bytes32, CoinRecord] = {}
# Add coins that are confirmed in the reverted blocks to the list of updated co... | @@ -574,7 +583,8 @@ async def rollback_to_block(self, block_index: int) -> dict[bytes32, CoinRecord]
)
for row in rows:
coin = self.row_to_coin(row)
- record = CoinRecord(coin, row[0], uint32(0), row[2], row[6])
+ coinbase = False if row[2] == 0 e... | chia/full_node/coin_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 101 | 51 | 51 | false | Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord | 19,848 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | matt-o-how | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/coin_store.py
PR Title: Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord
BEFORE CODE: rows = await conn.execute_fetchall(
"SELECT confirmed_index, spent_index, coinbase, puzzle_hash, "
"coin_parent, amount, ti... | ```suggestion
record = CoinRecord(coin, row[0], uint32(0), row[2] != 0, row[6])
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async with self.db_wrapper.writer_maybe_transaction() as conn:
rows = await conn.execute_fetchall(
"SELECT confirmed_index, spent_index, coinbase, puzzle_hash, "
"coin_parent, amount, timestamp, coin_name FROM coin_record WHERE confirmed_index>?",
(blo... | I would suggest this or the alternative below.
```suggestion
coinbase = row[2] != 0
``` | async def rollback_to_block(self, block_index: int) -> dict[bytes32, CoinRecord]:
"""
Note that block_index can be negative, in which case everything is rolled back
Returns a map of coin ID to coin record for modified items.
"""
coin_changes: dict[bytes32, CoinRecord] = {}
... | @@ -574,7 +583,8 @@ async def rollback_to_block(self, block_index: int) -> dict[bytes32, CoinRecord]
)
for row in rows:
coin = self.row_to_coin(row)
- record = CoinRecord(coin, row[0], uint32(0), row[2], row[6])
+ coinbase = False if row[2] == 0 e... | chia/full_node/coin_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 106 | 51 | 51 | false | Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord | 19,848 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | matt-o-how | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/coin_store.py
PR Title: Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord
BEFORE CODE: async with self.db_wrapper.writer_maybe_transaction() as conn:
rows = await conn.execute_fetchall(
"SELECT confirmed_index, spent_i... | I would suggest this or the alternative below.
```suggestion
coinbase = row[2] != 0
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
(make_test_conds(birth_height=10), None),
(make_test_conds(birth_height=11), Err.ASSERT_MY_BIRTH_HEIGHT_FAILED),
# coin timestamp is 10000
(make_test_conds(birth_seconds=uint64(COIN_TIMESTAMP - 1)), Err.ASSERT_MY_BIRTH_SECONDS_FAILED),
(make_test_conds(birth_s... | this is the rust function. I don't think it will ever return `Err`, will it?
It looks like `res` is mistyped | (make_test_conds(birth_height=10), None),
(make_test_conds(birth_height=11), Err.ASSERT_MY_BIRTH_HEIGHT_FAILED),
# coin timestamp is 10000
(make_test_conds(birth_seconds=uint64(COIN_TIMESTAMP - 1)), Err.ASSERT_MY_BIRTH_SECONDS_FAILED),
(make_test_conds(birth_s... | @@ -436,15 +436,17 @@ def test_conditions(
conds: SpendBundleConditions,
expected: Err | None,
) -> None:
- assert (
- check_time_locks(
- dict(self.REMOVALS),
- conds,
- self.PREV_BLOCK_HEIGHT,
- self.PREV_BLOCK_TIMEST... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 108 | 51 | 51 | false | Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord | 19,848 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | matt-o-how | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py
PR Title: Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord
BEFORE CODE: (make_test_conds(birth_height=10), None),
(make_test_conds(birth_height=11), Err.ASSERT_MY_BIRTH_HEIGHT_FAILED),
... | this is the rust function. I don't think it will ever return `Err`, will it?
It looks like `res` is mistyped | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# reserve fee cannot be greater than UINT64_MAX per consensus rule.
# run_generator() would fail
assert_fee_sum = uint64(0 if conds is None else conds.reserve_fee)
# 17. Check that the assert fee sum <= fees, and that each reserved fee is non-negative
if fees < assert_fee_sum:
return Err.R... | I think it would be good to clarify that `error` is `int | None` here too. It is, right? |
# reserve fee cannot be greater than UINT64_MAX per consensus rule.
# run_generator() would fail
assert_fee_sum = uint64(0 if conds is None else conds.reserve_fee)
# 17. Check that the assert fee sum <= fees, and that each reserved fee is non-negative
if fees < assert_fee_sum:
return Err.R... | chia/consensus/block_body_validation.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | question | 88 | 41 | 41 | false | Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord | 19,848 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | matt-o-how | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/consensus/block_body_validation.py
PR Title: Import check_time_locks() and CoinRecord
BEFORE CODE:
# reserve fee cannot be greater than UINT64_MAX per consensus rule.
# run_generator() would fail
assert_fee_sum = uint64(0 if conds is None els... | I think it would be good to clarify that `error` is `int | None` here too. It is, right? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. | |
"""
This function checks for double spends, unknown spends and conflicting transactions in mempool.
Returns Error (if any), the set of existing MempoolItems with conflicting spends (if any).
Note that additions are not checked for duplicates, because having duplicate additions requires also
having d... | Am I understanding this correctly, that the underlying issue is that we change `latest_singleton_lineage.coin_id` without updating the corresponding dictionary key in `item.bundle_coin_spends`. | """
This function checks for double spends, unknown spends and conflicting transactions in mempool.
Returns Error (if any), the set of existing MempoolItems with conflicting spends (if any).
Note that additions are not checked for duplicates, because having duplicate additions requires also
having d... | @@ -258,7 +258,22 @@ def check_removals(
for item in conflicting_items:
if item in conflicts:
continue
- conflict_bcs = item.bundle_coin_spends[coin_id]
+ conflict_bcs = item.bundle_coin_spends.get(coin_id)
+ if conflict_bcs is None:
+ ... | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 193 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3484 Handle items that spend an older ff version when newer lineage exists | 19,865 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: CHIA-3484 Handle items that spend an older ff version when newer lineage exists
BEFORE CODE: """
This function checks for double spends, unknown spends and conflicting transactions in mempool.
Returns Err... | Am I understanding this correctly, that the underlying issue is that we change `latest_singleton_lineage.coin_id` without updating the corresponding dictionary key in `item.bundle_coin_spends`. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async with self.db_wrapper.reader_no_transaction() as conn:
async with conn.execute(
"SELECT header_hash,block_record FROM full_blocks "
"WHERE height >= ? AND height <= ? AND in_main_chain=1",
(start, stop),
) as cursor:
fo... | ```suggestion
assert self.db_wrapper.db_version == 2
``` | async with self.db_wrapper.reader_no_transaction() as conn:
async with conn.execute(
"SELECT header_hash,block_record FROM full_blocks "
"WHERE height >= ? AND height <= ? AND in_main_chain=1",
(start, stop),
) as cursor:
fo... | @@ -468,7 +478,8 @@ async def get_block_bytes_in_range(
No orphan blocks.
"""
- assert self.db_wrapper.db_version == 2
+ if self.db_wrapper.db_version != 2:
+ raise RuntimeError("get_block_bytes_in_range requires DB version 2") | chia/full_node/block_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 66 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify `BlockStore` | 19,880 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | richardkiss | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/block_store.py
PR Title: Simplify `BlockStore`
BEFORE CODE: async with self.db_wrapper.reader_no_transaction() as conn:
async with conn.execute(
"SELECT header_hash,block_record FROM full_blocks "
... | ```suggestion
assert self.db_wrapper.db_version == 2
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
for a in range(start, end):
if peak_height < uint32(a):
self.service.log.warning("requested block is higher than known peak ")
break
header_hash: Optional[bytes32] = self.service.blockchain.height_to_hash(uint32(a))
if header_hash is None:
... | just drop it entirely then?
```suggestion
``` | for a in range(start, end):
if peak_height < uint32(a):
self.service.log.warning("requested block is higher than known peak ")
break
header_hash: Optional[bytes32] = self.service.blockchain.height_to_hash(uint32(a))
if header_hash is None:
... | @@ -481,10 +481,10 @@ async def get_block_spends(self, request: dict[str, Any]) -> EndpointResult:
if full_block is None:
raise ValueError(f"Block {header_hash.hex()} not found")
- spends: list[dict[str, list[CoinSpend]]] = []
+ spends: dict[str, list[CoinSpend]] | chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 46 | 51 | 51 | false | Bump chia rs 0.28 | 19,891 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_api.py
PR Title: Bump chia rs 0.28
BEFORE CODE: for a in range(start, end):
if peak_height < uint32(a):
self.service.log.warning("requested block is higher than known peak ")
brea... | just drop it entirely then?
```suggestion
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
*(PluginRemote.unmarshal(marshalled=marshalled) for marshalled in new_uploaders),
*conf_file_uploaders,
]
old_downloaders = config["data_layer"].get("downloaders", [])
new_downloaders = plugins_config.get("downloaders", [])
conf_file_uploaders = await load_plugin_configurations(service_... | [nitpick] The trailing comma added here is inconsistent with the existing code style and appears unnecessary for a single function call argument.
```suggestion
enable=os.environ.get(f"CHIA_INSTRUMENT_{SERVICE_NAME.upper()}") is not None
``` | *(PluginRemote.unmarshal(marshalled=marshalled) for marshalled in new_uploaders),
*conf_file_uploaders,
]
old_downloaders = config["data_layer"].get("downloaders", [])
new_downloaders = plugins_config.get("downloaders", [])
conf_file_uploaders = await load_plugin_configurations(service_... | @@ -143,7 +144,7 @@ def main() -> int:
root_path = resolve_root_path(override=None)
with maybe_manage_task_instrumentation(
- enable=os.environ.get(f"CHIA_INSTRUMENT_{SERVICE_NAME.upper()}") is not None
+ enable=os.environ.get(f"CHIA_INSTRUMENT_{SERVICE_NAME.upper()}") is not None, | chia/data_layer/start_data_layer.py | 26 | Python | 0.786 | suggestion | 248 | 33 | 33 | false | Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server` | 19,895 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | Copilot | richardkiss | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/data_layer/start_data_layer.py
PR Title: Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server`
BEFORE CODE: *(PluginRemote.unmarshal(marshalled=marshalled) for marshalled in new_uploaders),
*conf_file_uploaders,
]
old_downloaders = config["data... | [nitpick] The trailing comma added here is inconsistent with the existing code style and appears unnecessary for a single function call argument.
```suggestion
enable=os.environ.get(f"CHIA_INSTRUMENT_{SERVICE_NAME.upper()}") is not None
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia_rs import ConsensusConstants
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.consensus.constants import replace_str_to_bytes
from chia.consensus.default_constants import DEFAULT_CONSTANTS, update_testnet_overrides
from chia.protocols.o... | is this related to the other changes? | import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia_rs import ConsensusConstants
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.consensus.constants import replace_str_to_bytes
from chia.consensus.default_constants import DEFAULT_CONSTANTS, update_testnet_overrides
from chia.protocols.o... | @@ -11,21 +11,18 @@
from chia.consensus.constants import replace_str_to_bytes
from chia.consensus.default_constants import DEFAULT_CONSTANTS, update_testnet_overrides
from chia.protocols.outbound_message import NodeType
-from chia.server.aliases import TimelordService
from chia.server.resolve_peer_info import get_u... | chia/timelord/start_timelord.py | 26 | Python | 0.143 | question | 37 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server` | 19,895 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | richardkiss | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/timelord/start_timelord.py
PR Title: Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server`
BEFORE CODE: import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia_rs import ConsensusConstants
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.con... | is this related to the other changes? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async def create_full_node_service(
root_path: pathlib.Path,
config: dict[str, Any],
consensus_constants: ConsensusConstants,
connect_to_daemon: bool = True,
override_capabilities: Optional[list[tuple[uint16, str]]] = None,
) -> FullNodeService:
service_config = config[SERVICE_NAME]
network... | at a glance anyways, i like this change. i think it should be applied either consistently or not at all. or maybe not at all here and consistently in another pr. whatever. | async def create_full_node_service(
root_path: pathlib.Path,
config: dict[str, Any],
consensus_constants: ConsensusConstants,
connect_to_daemon: bool = True,
override_capabilities: Optional[list[tuple[uint16, str]]] = None,
) -> FullNodeService:
service_config = config[SERVICE_NAME]
network... | @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ async def create_full_node_service(
if service_config.get("start_rpc_server", True):
rpc_info = (FullNodeRpcApi, service_config["rpc_port"])
- return Service(
+ return FullNodeService( | chia/full_node/start_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 174 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server` | 19,895 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | richardkiss | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/start_full_node.py
PR Title: Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server`
BEFORE CODE: async def create_full_node_service(
root_path: pathlib.Path,
config: dict[str, Any],
consensus_constants: ConsensusConstants,
connect_to_daemon: bo... | at a glance anyways, i like this change. i think it should be applied either consistently or not at all. or maybe not at all here and consistently in another pr. whatever. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
from __future__ import annotations
import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.full_node.full_node_rpc_api import FullNodeRpcApi
from chia.introducer.introducer import Introducer
from chia.introducer.introducer_api import IntroducerAPI
from ... | i think, for consistency, this belongs in a new file `chia/introducer/introducer_service.py`? | from __future__ import annotations
import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.introducer.introducer import Introducer
from chia.introducer.introducer_api import IntroducerAPI
from chia.introducer.introducer_service import IntroducerService
... | @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
SERVICE_NAME = "introducer"
+IntroducerService = Service[Introducer, IntroducerAPI, FullNodeRpcApi]
+ | chia/introducer/start_introducer.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | question | 93 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server` | 19,895 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | richardkiss | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/introducer/start_introducer.py
PR Title: Simplify dependencies wrt `chia.server`
BEFORE CODE: from __future__ import annotations
import os
import pathlib
import sys
from typing import Any, Optional
from chia.apis import ApiProtocolRegistry
from chia.ful... | i think, for consistency, this belongs in a new file `chia/introducer/introducer_service.py`? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
rows_updated: int = 0
for batch in to_batches(coin_names, SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER):
name_params = ",".join(["?"] * len(batch.entries))
ret: Cursor = await conn.execute(
f"UPDATE coin_record INDEXED BY sqlite_autoindex_coin_record_1 "
... | it seems really unlikely that performing 2 queries instead of 1 would ever be faster. If we want to do this, I think `CoinStore` would have to know which index to use. I also think we need more than a hunch to put this in the release branch | async def _set_spent(self, coin_names: list[bytes32], index: uint32) -> None:
assert len(coin_names) == 0 or index > 0
if len(coin_names) == 0:
return None
async with self.db_wrapper.writer_maybe_transaction() as conn:
rows_updated: int = 0
for batch in ... | @@ -634,11 +636,19 @@ async def _set_spent(self, coin_names: list[bytes32], index: uint32) -> None:
# Lookup the most recent unspent lineage that matches a puzzle hash
async def get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash(self, puzzle_hash: bytes32) -> Optional[UnspentLineageInfo]:
async with self.db_wr... | chia/full_node/coin_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 240 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3595 Be explicit about falling back to coin_puzzle_hash index in get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash | 19,909 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/coin_store.py
PR Title: CHIA-3595 Be explicit about falling back to coin_puzzle_hash index in get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash
BEFORE CODE: rows_updated: int = 0
for batch in to_batches(coin_names, SQLITE_MAX_VARI... | it seems really unlikely that performing 2 queries instead of 1 would ever be faster. If we want to do this, I think `CoinStore` would have to know which index to use. I also think we need more than a hunch to put this in the release branch | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
log.info("DB: Creating index coin_parent_index")
await conn.execute("CREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS coin_parent_index on coin_record(coin_parent)")
async with conn.execute("SELECT 1 FROM coin_record LIMIT 1") as cursor:
is_new_db = await cursor.fetchone() is None
... | this is not right. you only use the new index on the first ever run of the full node. You should base this in whether the index exists or not |
log.info("DB: Creating index coin_parent_index")
await conn.execute("CREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS coin_parent_index on coin_record(coin_parent)")
async with conn.execute("SELECT 1 FROM coin_record LIMIT 1") as cursor:
is_new_db = await cursor.fetchone() is None
... | @@ -82,6 +85,7 @@ async def create(cls, db_wrapper: DBWrapper2) -> CoinStore:
WHERE spent_index = -1
"""
)
+ self._unspent_lineage_for_ph_idx = "coin_record_ph_ff_unspent_idx" | chia/full_node/coin_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 141 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3595 Be explicit about falling back to coin_puzzle_hash index in get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash | 19,909 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/coin_store.py
PR Title: CHIA-3595 Be explicit about falling back to coin_puzzle_hash index in get_unspent_lineage_info_for_puzzle_hash
BEFORE CODE:
log.info("DB: Creating index coin_parent_index")
await conn.execute("CRE... | this is not right. you only use the new index on the first ever run of the full node. You should base this in whether the index exists or not | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert newer_block.timestamp is not None and older_block.timestamp is not None
if newer_block.height == older_block.height: # small chain not long enough to have a block in between
return None
average_block_time = uint32(
(newer_block.timestamp - older_block.timestamp) / (newer_block.hei... | this doesn't seem to improve throughput of these RPCs. It's not clear to me why, perhaps there's only a single `asyncio.Task` per RPC connection. In either case, compute heavy work should not be performed on the main thread. | older_block = await get_nearest_transaction_block(blockchain, prev_block)
assert newer_block.timestamp is not None and older_block.timestamp is not None
if newer_block.height == older_block.height: # small chain not long enough to have a block in between
return None
average_block_time = uint... | @@ -98,6 +101,7 @@ def __init__(self, service: FullNode) -> None:
self.service = service
self.service_name = "chia_full_node"
self.cached_blockchain_state: Optional[dict[str, Any]] = None
+ self.executor = ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=2, thread_name_prefix="node-rpc-") | chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.786 | suggestion | 224 | 51 | 51 | false | fix validate_rpcs. Run RPC compute heavy jobs in a thread pool | 19,922 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_rpc_api.py
PR Title: fix validate_rpcs. Run RPC compute heavy jobs in a thread pool
BEFORE CODE:
assert newer_block.timestamp is not None and older_block.timestamp is not None
if newer_block.height == older_block.height: # s... | this doesn't seem to improve throughput of these RPCs. It's not clear to me why, perhaps there's only a single `asyncio.Task` per RPC connection. In either case, compute heavy work should not be performed on the main thread. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# Set initial values for the loop
pipeline: set[asyncio.Task[None]] = set()
completed_requests: int = 0
# measure time for performance measurement per segment
cycle_start: float = time.monotonic()
# also measure time for the whole process
start_time: float = cyc... | when running this tool for all 3 RPC calls, each iteration adds 3 pending tasks, but only one was popped off. Without this change, `pipeline` is allowed to grow indefinitely. |
# Set initial values for the loop
pipeline: set[asyncio.Task[None]] = set()
completed_requests: int = 0
# measure time for performance measurement per segment
cycle_start: float = time.monotonic()
# also measure time for the whole process
start_time: float = cyc... | @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ def add_tasks_for_height(height: int) -> None:
for i in range(start_height, end_height + 1):
add_tasks_for_height(height=i)
# Make Status Updates.
- if len(pipeline) >= pipeline_depth:
+ while len(pipeline) >= pipeline_depth: | tools/validate_rpcs.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 174 | 51 | 51 | false | fix validate_rpcs. Run RPC compute heavy jobs in a thread pool | 19,922 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: tools/validate_rpcs.py
PR Title: fix validate_rpcs. Run RPC compute heavy jobs in a thread pool
BEFORE CODE:
# Set initial values for the loop
pipeline: set[asyncio.Task[None]] = set()
completed_requests: int = 0
# measure tim... | when running this tool for all 3 RPC calls, each iteration adds 3 pending tasks, but only one was popped off. Without this change, `pipeline` is allowed to grow indefinitely. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
"""
The harvester receives a new signage point from the farmer, this happens at the start of each slot.
The harvester does a few things:
1. The harvester applies the plot filter for each of the plots, to select the proportion which are eligible
for this signage point and challeng... | i would change to calculate_requierd_strength since the plot strength itself is fixed in the plot and returned in the proof bytes, i think this name is confusing, the var name should be requierd_strength as well | peer: WSChiaConnection,
) -> int:
proofs_found = 0
for filename_sublist_awaitable in asyncio.as_completed(awaitables):
filename, sublist = await filename_sublist_awaitable
time_taken = time.monotonic() - start_time
if time_taken > 8:
self.h... | @@ -95,6 +96,8 @@ async def new_signage_point_harvester(
start = time.monotonic()
assert len(new_challenge.challenge_hash) == 32
+ plot_strength = calculate_plot_strength(self.harvester.constants, new_challenge.last_tx_height) | chia/harvester/harvester_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 212 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API | 19,969 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | almogdepaz | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/harvester/harvester_api.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API
BEFORE CODE: """
The harvester receives a new signage point from the farmer, this happens at the start of each slot.
The harvester does a fe... | i would change to calculate_requierd_strength since the plot strength itself is fixed in the plot and returned in the proof bytes, i think this name is confusing, the var name should be requierd_strength as well | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
proof_xs,
),
)
)
return responses
except Exception as e:
self.harvester.log.error(f"Unknown error: {e}")
return []
... | im not sure that we would want the filtering done in the prover and not in chia-blockchain for maintainability, unless we expect to wrap the v2prover like we did with v1 then we can filter in the wrapper
also this is not relevant to v1 plots right ? so im leaning into doing the filtering here in new_signage_point on... | size = plot_info.prover.get_size().size_v2
assert size is not None
return PartialProofsData(
new_challenge.challenge_hash,
new_challenge.sp_hash,
good_partial_proofs[0].hex() + str(filename.resolve()),
... | @@ -108,7 +111,7 @@ def blocking_lookup(filename: Path, plot_info: PlotInfo) -> list[tuple[bytes32,
new_challenge.sp_hash,
)
try:
- quality_strings = plot_info.prover.get_qualities_for_challenge(sp_challenge_hash)
+ quality_str... | chia/harvester/harvester_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 364 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API | 19,969 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | almogdepaz | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/harvester/harvester_api.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API
BEFORE CODE: proof_xs,
),
)
... | im not sure that we would want the filtering done in the prover and not in chia-blockchain for maintainability, unless we expect to wrap the v2prover like we did with v1 then we can filter in the wrapper
also this is not relevant to v1 plots right ? so im leaning into doing the filtering here in new_signage_point on... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
"""
The harvester receives a new signage point from the farmer, this happens at the start of each slot.
The harvester does a few things:
1. The harvester applies the plot filter for each of the plots, to select the proportion which are eligible
for this signage point and challeng... | i think change var to required_plot_strength as well | """
The harvester receives a new signage point from the farmer, this happens at the start of each slot.
The harvester does a few things:
1. The harvester applies the plot filter for each of the plots, to select the proportion which are eligible
for this signage point and challeng... | @@ -152,6 +153,8 @@ async def new_signage_point_harvester(
start = time.monotonic()
assert len(new_challenge.challenge_hash) == 32
+ plot_strength = calculate_required_plot_strength(self.harvester.constants, new_challenge.last_tx_height) | chia/harvester/harvester_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | suggestion | 52 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API | 19,969 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | almogdepaz | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/harvester/harvester_api.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API
BEFORE CODE: """
The harvester receives a new signage point from the farmer, this happens at the start of each slot.
The harvester does a fe... | i think change var to required_plot_strength as well | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert prover.get_version() == PlotVersion.V2
assert prover.get_filename() == "/nonexistent/path/test.plot2"
def test_v2_prover_get_size_raises_error(self) -> None:
prover = V2Prover("/nonexistent/path/test.plot2")
with pytest.raises(NotImplementedError, match="V2 plot format is not... | should be AssertionError error right ? | assert prover.get_version() == PlotVersion.V2
assert prover.get_filename() == "/nonexistent/path/test.plot2"
def test_v2_prover_get_size_raises_error(self) -> None:
prover = V2Prover("/nonexistent/path/test.plot2")
with pytest.raises(NotImplementedError, match="V2 plot format is not... | @@ -38,7 +38,9 @@ def test_v2_prover_get_id_raises_error(self) -> None:
def test_v2_prover_get_qualities_for_challenge_raises_error(self) -> None:
prover = V2Prover("/nonexistent/path/test.plot2")
- with pytest.raises(NotImplementedError, match="V2 plot format is not yet implemented"):
+ w... | chia/_tests/plotting/test_prover.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | question | 38 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API | 19,969 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | almogdepaz | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/plotting/test_prover.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3654] [CHIA-3537] [CHIA-3673] stub chiapos2 API
BEFORE CODE: assert prover.get_version() == PlotVersion.V2
assert prover.get_filename() == "/nonexistent/path/test.plot2"
def test_v2_prove... | should be AssertionError error right ? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
return
except RuntimeError as e:
if str(e) == "GRResult_NoProof received":
log.info(f"Proof dropped due to line point compression. Filepath: {plot_path}")
continue
else:
lo... | what if your plots are not on a machine with a GPU ?
| return
except RuntimeError as e:
if str(e) == "GRResult_NoProof received":
log.info(f"Proof dropped due to line point compression. Filepath: {plot_path}")
continue
else:
lo... | @@ -201,12 +217,17 @@ def process_plot(plot_path: Path, plot_info: PlotInfo, num_start: int, num_end:
caught_exception = True
break
- for index, quality_str in enumerate(qualities):
+ for index, proof in enumerate(proofs):
# ... | chia/plotting/check_plots.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | question | 54 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3701] Check plots v2 | 19,982 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | almogdepaz | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/plotting/check_plots.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3701] Check plots v2
BEFORE CODE: return
except RuntimeError as e:
if str(e) == "GRResult_NoProof received":
log.info(f"Proof dropped d... | what if your plots are not on a machine with a GPU ?
| You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
d: Optional[uint8]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class PostInitTestClassList(Streamable):
a: list[uint8]
b: list[list[G1Element]]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class PostInitTestClassTuple(Streamable):
a: tuple[uint8, str]
b: tuple[tuple[uint8, str], bytes32]
@streamable
@dataclass... | how about different names just to avoid confusion with `enum.IntEnum` and `enum.StrEnum`. | d: Optional[uint8]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class PostInitTestClassList(Streamable):
a: list[uint8]
b: list[list[G1Element]]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class PostInitTestClassTuple(Streamable):
a: tuple[uint8, str]
b: tuple[tuple[uint8, str], bytes32]
@streamable
@dataclass... | @@ -423,6 +445,25 @@ class PostInitTestClassDict(Streamable):
b: dict[bytes32, dict[uint8, str]]
+@streamable_enum(uint32)
+class IntEnum(Enum): | chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 89 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable | 19,983 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable
BEFORE CODE: d: Optional[uint8]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class PostInitTestClassList(Streamable):
a: list[uint8]
b: list[list[G1Element]]
@... | how about different names just to avoid confusion with `enum.IntEnum` and `enum.StrEnum`. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([0]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([1, 2]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class TestClassUint(Streamable):
... | is there a clear `message=` that could be passed? | with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([0]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([1, 2]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class TestClassUint(Streamable):
... | @@ -623,6 +671,17 @@ class TestClassUint(Streamable):
TestClassUint.from_bytes(b"\x00\x00")
+def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int_enum() -> None:
+ @streamable
+ @dataclass(frozen=True)
+ class TestClassIntEnum(Streamable):
+ a: IntEnum
+
+ # Does not have the required uint size
+ w... | chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | question | 49 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable | 19,983 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable
BEFORE CODE: with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([0]))
TestClassOption... | is there a clear `message=` that could be passed? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([0]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([1, 2]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
... | i totally misread this at first. maybe...
```suggestion
# passed bytes are incorrect size for serialization proxy
``` | # Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([0]))
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([1, 2]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
... | @@ -623,6 +671,17 @@ class TestClassUint(Streamable):
TestClassUint.from_bytes(b"\x00\x00")
+def test_ambiguous_deserialization_int_enum() -> None:
+ @streamable
+ @dataclass(frozen=True)
+ class TestClassIntEnum(Streamable):
+ a: IntEnum
+
+ # Does not have the required uint size | chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | bug | 124 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable | 19,983 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable
BEFORE CODE: # Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassOptional.from_bytes(bytes([]))
TestClassOptional.... | i totally misread this at first. maybe...
```suggestion
# passed bytes are incorrect size for serialization proxy
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
class TestClassTuple(Streamable):
a: tuple[uint8, str]
# Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassTuple.from_bytes(bytes([0, 0, 100, 24]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_str() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class TestCl... | same comment as above and my misunderstanding, but, i'm not sure i understand. is the `StrEnum` implicitly configured for only three character strings because that's what the two values are? or is this more generally saying the bytes don't match any of the values? or... | class TestClassTuple(Streamable):
a: tuple[uint8, str]
# Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
TestClassTuple.from_bytes(bytes([0, 0, 100, 24]))
def test_ambiguous_deserialization_str() -> None:
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class TestCl... | @@ -656,6 +715,17 @@ class TestClassStr(Streamable):
TestClassStr.from_bytes(bytes([0, 0, 100, 24, 52]))
+def test_ambiguous_deserialization_str_enum() -> None:
+ @streamable
+ @dataclass(frozen=True)
+ class TestClassStr(Streamable):
+ a: StrEnum
+
+ # Does not have the required str siz... | chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 273 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable | 19,983 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/util/test_streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable
BEFORE CODE: class TestClassTuple(Streamable):
a: tuple[uint8, str]
# Does not have the required elements
with pytest.raises(AssertionError):
... | same comment as above and my misunderstanding, but, i'm not sure i understand. is the `StrEnum` implicitly configured for only three character strings because that's what the two values are? or is this more generally saying the bytes don't match any of the values? or... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class VersionedBlob(Streamable):
version: uint16
blob: bytes
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class UInt32Range(Streamable):
start: uint32 = uint32(0)
stop: uint32 = uint32.MAXIMUM
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class U... | this, or can we require the proxy itself be streamable?
```suggestion
def streamable_enum(proxy: type[object]) -> Callable[[_T_Enum], _T_Enum]:
```
maybe not in this pr, but maybe we need a type that is like a union of the rust streamableness and `Streamable`. or... |
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class VersionedBlob(Streamable):
version: uint16
blob: bytes
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class UInt32Range(Streamable):
start: uint32 = uint32(0)
stop: uint32 = uint32.MAXIMUM
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class U... | @@ -700,3 +714,15 @@ class UInt32Range(Streamable):
class UInt64Range(Streamable):
start: uint64 = uint64(0)
stop: uint64 = uint64.MAXIMUM
+
+
+_T_Enum = TypeVar("_T_Enum", bound=EnumMeta)
+
+
+def streamable_enum(proxy: type[Any]) -> Callable[[_T_Enum], _T_Enum]: | chia/util/streamable.py | 26 | Python | 0.929 | suggestion | 269 | 33 | 33 | false | [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable | 19,983 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/util/streamable.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3703] Add Enum support to streamable
BEFORE CODE:
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class VersionedBlob(Streamable):
version: uint16
blob: bytes
@streamable
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
cl... | this, or can we require the proxy itself be streamable?
```suggestion
def streamable_enum(proxy: type[object]) -> Callable[[_T_Enum], _T_Enum]:
```
maybe not in this pr, but maybe we need a type that is like a union of the rust streamableness and `Streamable`. or... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if ret.assert_before_height is not None:
ret.assert_before_height = min(ret.assert_before_height, h)
else:
ret.assert_before_height = h
if spend.before_seconds_relative is not None:
s = uint64(removal_coin_records[bytes32(spend.coin_id)].times... | I think `transaction_id` is a difficult term. Are these spend bundle IDs? If so, I think that would be a better name | if ret.assert_before_height is not None:
ret.assert_before_height = min(ret.assert_before_height, h)
else:
ret.assert_before_height = h
if spend.before_seconds_relative is not None:
s = uint64(removal_coin_records[bytes32(spend.coin_id)].times... | @@ -133,17 +133,10 @@ class SpendBundleAddInfo:
@dataclass
class NewPeakInfo:
- items: list[NewPeakItem]
+ transaction_ids: list[bytes32] | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 116 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3704 Optimize peak post processing by using transaction IDs instead of NewPeakItem elements | 19,985 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: CHIA-3704 Optimize peak post processing by using transaction IDs instead of NewPeakItem elements
BEFORE CODE: if ret.assert_before_height is not None:
ret.assert_before_height = min(ret.as... | I think `transaction_id` is a difficult term. Are these spend bundle IDs? If so, I think that would be a better name | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
mempool_new_peak_result = await self.mempool_manager.new_peak(self.blockchain.get_tx_peak(), spent_coins)
return PeakPostProcessingResult(
mempool_new_peak_result.transaction_ids,
mempool_new_peak_result.removals,
fns_peak_result,
hints_to_add,
... | where is `mempool_peak_added_tx_ids` initialized? | mempool_new_peak_result = await self.mempool_manager.new_peak(self.blockchain.get_tx_peak(), spent_coins)
return PeakPostProcessingResult(
mempool_new_peak_result.spend_bundle_ids,
mempool_new_peak_result.removals,
fns_peak_result,
hints_to_add,
... | @@ -1961,9 +1963,9 @@ async def peak_post_processing_2(
record = state_change_summary.peak
for signage_point in ppp_result.signage_points:
await self.signage_point_post_processing(*signage_point)
- for new_peak_item in ppp_result.mempool_peak_result:
- self.log.debug(f"A... | chia/full_node/full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | question | 49 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3704 Optimize peak post processing by using transaction IDs instead of NewPeakItem elements | 19,985 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3704 Optimize peak post processing by using transaction IDs instead of NewPeakItem elements
BEFORE CODE: mempool_new_peak_result = await self.mempool_manager.new_peak(self.blockchain.get_tx_peak(), spent_coins... | where is `mempool_peak_added_tx_ids` initialized? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
compose_rate_limits_cache: dict[int, dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]]] = {}
# this class is used to configure the *rate* limit for a message type. The
# limits are counts and size per 60 seconds.
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class RLSettings:
# if true, messages affect and are limit... | not sure it's wrong, but it seems a bit odd that `aggregate_limit.aggregate_limit` is `False`. maybe this value is unused.
> [!NOTE]
> just formatting change here for clarity
```suggestion
aggregate_limit = RLSettings(
aggregate_limit=False,
frequency=1000,
max_size=100 * 1024**3,
max_total_size=100... |
# this class is used to configure the *rate* limit for a message type. The
# limits are counts and size per 60 seconds.
@dataclasses.dataclass(frozen=True)
class RLSettings:
# if true, messages affect and are limited by the per connection aggregate limiter,
# which affects messages across message types
ag... | @@ -31,186 +33,159 @@ class Unlimited:
max_size: int # Max size of each request
-def get_rate_limits_to_use(our_capabilities: list[Capability], peer_capabilities: list[Capability]) -> dict[str, Any]:
+aggregate_limit = RLSettings(False, 1000, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024) | chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py | 26 | Python | 0.857 | bug | 811 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE: compose_rate_limits_cache: dict[int, dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]]] = {}
# this class is used to configure the *rate* limit for a message type. Th... | not sure it's wrong, but it seems a bit odd that `aggregate_limit.aggregate_limit` is `False`. maybe this value is unused.
> [!NOTE]
> just formatting change here for clarity
```suggestion
aggregate_limit = RLSettings(
aggregate_limit=False,
frequency=1000,
max_size=100 * 1024**3,
max_total_size=100... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# this class is used to indicate that a message type is not subject to a rate
# limit, but just a per-message size limit. This may be appropriate for response
# messages that are implicitly limited by their corresponding request message
# Unlimited message types are also not subject to the overall limit across all
# m... | i personally find literals to be tidy, clear, non-mutating, and very flexible.
```suggestion
composed = {
**rate_limits[1],
**rate_limits[2],
)
``` | # this class is used to indicate that a message type is not subject to a rate
# limit, but just a per-message size limit. This may be appropriate for response
# messages that are implicitly limited by their corresponding request message
# Unlimited message types are also not subject to the overall limit across all
# me... | @@ -31,186 +33,159 @@ class Unlimited:
max_size: int # Max size of each request
-def get_rate_limits_to_use(our_capabilities: list[Capability], peer_capabilities: list[Capability]) -> dict[str, Any]:
+aggregate_limit = RLSettings(False, 1000, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)
+
+
+def get_ra... | chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 189 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE:
# this class is used to indicate that a message type is not subject to a rate
# limit, but just a per-message size limit. This may be appropriate for response
# messages that... | i personally find literals to be tidy, clear, non-mutating, and very flexible.
```suggestion
composed = {
**rate_limits[1],
**rate_limits[2],
)
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
self.message_counts = Counter()
self.message_cumulative_sizes = Counter()
self.non_tx_message_counts = 0
self.non_tx_cumulative_size = 0
try:
message_type = ProtocolMessageTypes(message.type)
except Exception as e:
log.warning(f"Inv... | is this accurate? do we mean to also be checking non-zero as the existing code does?
```suggestion
assert agg_limit.max_total_size is not None
``` | self.message_counts = Counter()
self.message_cumulative_sizes = Counter()
self.non_tx_message_counts = 0
self.non_tx_cumulative_size = 0
try:
message_type = ProtocolMessageTypes(message.type)
except Exception as e:
log.warning(f"Inv... | @@ -80,40 +80,34 @@ def process_msg_and_check(
proportion_of_limit: float = self.percentage_of_limit / 100
ret: bool = False
- rate_limits = get_rate_limits_to_use(our_capabilities, peer_capabilities)
+ rate_limits: dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]]
+ rate... | chia/server/rate_limits.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | question | 164 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/rate_limits.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE: self.message_counts = Counter()
self.message_cumulative_sizes = Counter()
self.non_tx_message_counts = 0
self.non_tx_cumulative_size =... | is this accurate? do we mean to also be checking non-zero as the existing code does?
```suggestion
assert agg_limit.max_total_size is not None
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
current_slot = int(self.get_time() // self.reset_seconds)
if current_slot != self.current_slot:
self.current_slot = current_slot
self.message_counts = Counter()
self.message_cumulative_sizes = Counter()
self.non_tx_message_counts = 0
self.non_t... | maybe worth keeping around an error message? like `limits = rate_limits.get(message_type)` and `if limits is None:`.
anyways, could at least be:
```suggestion
limits: Union[RLSettings, Unlimited] = rate_limits[message_type]
```
or to avoid accidentally expanding the type at some point
```suggestion
... | current_slot = int(self.get_time() // self.reset_seconds)
if current_slot != self.current_slot:
self.current_slot = current_slot
self.message_counts = Counter()
self.message_cumulative_sizes = Counter()
self.non_tx_message_counts = 0
self.non_t... | @@ -80,40 +80,34 @@ def process_msg_and_check(
proportion_of_limit: float = self.percentage_of_limit / 100
ret: bool = False
- rate_limits = get_rate_limits_to_use(our_capabilities, peer_capabilities)
+ rate_limits: dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]]
+ rate... | chia/server/rate_limits.py | 26 | Python | 1 | suggestion | 367 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/rate_limits.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE: current_slot = int(self.get_time() // self.reset_seconds)
if current_slot != self.current_slot:
self.current_slot = current_slot
self.message_... | maybe worth keeping around an error message? like `limits = rate_limits.get(message_type)` and `if limits is None:`.
anyways, could at least be:
```suggestion
limits: Union[RLSettings, Unlimited] = rate_limits[message_type]
```
or to avoid accidentally expanding the type at some point
```suggestion
... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# This will use the newest possible rate limits that both peers support. At this time there are only two
# options, v1 and v2.
if Capability.RATE_LIMITS_V2 in our_capabilities and Capability.RATE_LIMITS_V2 in peer_capabilities:
# Use V2 rate limits
if 2 in compose_rate_limits_cache:
... | would be nice to have a test (in tests) maybe like...
```
@pytest.mark.parametrize(argnames="version", argvalues=[1, 2])
def test_rate_limits_complete(version: int) -> None:
assert set(rate_limits[version].keys()) == set(ProtocolMessageTypes)
```
something about the 1 and 2 as well. maybe also tieing them to the... |
def get_rate_limits_to_use(
our_capabilities: list[Capability], peer_capabilities: list[Capability]
) -> tuple[dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]], RLSettings]:
# This will use the newest possible rate limits that both peers support. At this time there are only two
# options, v1 and v... | @@ -31,186 +33,159 @@ class Unlimited:
max_size: int # Max size of each request
-def get_rate_limits_to_use(our_capabilities: list[Capability], peer_capabilities: list[Capability]) -> dict[str, Any]:
+aggregate_limit = RLSettings(False, 1000, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024, 100 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)
+
+
+def get_ra... | chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py | 26 | Python | 0.929 | suggestion | 352 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/rate_limit_numbers.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE: # This will use the newest possible rate limits that both peers support. At this time there are only two
# options, v1 and v2.
if Capability.RATE_LIMITS_V2 in our... | would be nice to have a test (in tests) maybe like...
```
@pytest.mark.parametrize(argnames="version", argvalues=[1, 2])
def test_rate_limits_complete(version: int) -> None:
assert set(rate_limits[version].keys()) == set(ProtocolMessageTypes)
```
something about the 1 and 2 as well. maybe also tieing them to the... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
# * number of bytes / 60 seconds for transaction messages
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_datacases(name="incoming", true="incoming", false="outgoing")
@boolean_datacases(name="tx_msg", true="tx", false="non-tx")
@boolean_datacases(name="limit_size", true="size-limit", false="count-limit")
async def test_limits_v2(incomi... | is the intent of these 1024s to be `len(message_data)`? if so, might be worth changing the four cases here. | # * number of bytes / 60 seconds for transaction messages
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_datacases(name="incoming", true="incoming", false="outgoing")
@boolean_datacases(name="tx_msg", true="tx", false="non-tx")
@boolean_datacases(name="limit_size", true="size-limit", false="count-limit")
async def test_limits_v2(incomi... | @@ -66,39 +65,22 @@ async def test_limits_v2(incoming: bool, tx_msg: bool, limit_size: bool, monkeyp
message_data = b"\0" * 1024
msg_type = ProtocolMessageTypes.new_transaction
- limits: dict[str, Any] = {}
+ limits: dict[ProtocolMessageTypes, Union[RLSettings, Unlimited]]
if limit_size:
- ... | chia/_tests/core/server/test_rate_limits.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 108 | 51 | 51 | false | Simplify rate limit numbers | 19,991 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/server/test_rate_limits.py
PR Title: Simplify rate limit numbers
BEFORE CODE: # * number of bytes / 60 seconds for transaction messages
@pytest.mark.anyio
@boolean_datacases(name="incoming", true="incoming", false="outgoing")
@boolean_dataca... | is the intent of these 1024s to be `len(message_data)`? if so, might be worth changing the four cases here. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
difficulty: uint64
sub_slot_iters: uint64
pool_contract_puzzle_hash: bytes32
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class HarvesterHandshake(Streamable):
farmer_public_keys: list[G1Element]
pool_public_keys: list[G1Element]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class NewSignagePointHarvester(Streamab... | ```suggestion
# message format is used if the protocol version is 0.0.37 or higher
``` | difficulty: uint64
sub_slot_iters: uint64
pool_contract_puzzle_hash: bytes32
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class HarvesterHandshake(Streamable):
farmer_public_keys: list[G1Element]
pool_public_keys: list[G1Element]
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class NewSignagePointHarvester(Streamab... | @@ -34,6 +34,20 @@ class HarvesterHandshake(Streamable):
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class NewSignagePointHarvester(Streamable):
+ challenge_hash: bytes32
+ difficulty: uint64
+ sub_slot_iters: uint64
+ signage_point_index: uint8
+ sp_hash: bytes32
+ pool_difficulties: list[PoolDifficulty]
... | chia/protocols/harvester_protocol.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 88 | 51 | 51 | false | support previous harvester protocol | 19,994 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/protocols/harvester_protocol.py
PR Title: support previous harvester protocol
BEFORE CODE: difficulty: uint64
sub_slot_iters: uint64
pool_contract_puzzle_hash: bytes32
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class HarvesterHandshake(Streamable):... | ```suggestion
# message format is used if the protocol version is 0.0.37 or higher
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.coin_id == latest_lineage_id
# Let's update the lineage with a new version of the singleton
new_latest_lineage = Coin(version2_id, singleton_ph, singleton_spend2.coin.amount)
new_latest_lineage_id = new_latest_lineage.name... | can you change this to describe what's being tested? is it "tests that transactions that are deferred because of a time-lock is retried once the time-lock allows them"? | assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.coin_id == latest_lineage_id
# Let's update the lineage with a new version of the singleton
new_latest_lineage = Coin(version2_id, singleton_ph, singleton_spend2.coin.amount)
new_latest_lineage_id = new_latest_lineage.name... | @@ -3260,3 +3261,41 @@ async def test_different_ff_versions() -> None:
latest_singleton_lineage2 = new_mi2.bundle_coin_spends[version2_id].latest_singleton_lineage
assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.coin_id == new_latest_lineage_id
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pyte... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | question | 168 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,002 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py
PR Title: CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.c... | can you change this to describe what's being tested? is it "tests that transactions that are deferred because of a time-lock is retried once the time-lock allows them"? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("optimized_path", [True, False])
async def test_new_peak_txs_added(optimized_path: bool) -> None:
"""
Covers the scenario where new peak returns added transactions as a result
of retrying potential transactions.
"""
coins = TestCoins([TEST_COIN], {})
m... | does `get_mempool_item()` not return deferred items?
It's not obvious that this is correct. | @pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize(
"condition_and_error",
[
(ConditionOpcode.ASSERT_HEIGHT_RELATIVE, Err.ASSERT_HEIGHT_RELATIVE_FAILED),
(ConditionOpcode.ASSERT_HEIGHT_ABSOLUTE, Err.ASSERT_HEIGHT_ABSOLUTE_FAILED),
],
)
@pytest.mark.parametrize("optimized_path", [True, False])
async... | @@ -3260,3 +3261,41 @@ async def test_different_ff_versions() -> None:
latest_singleton_lineage2 = new_mi2.bundle_coin_spends[version2_id].latest_singleton_lineage
assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.coin_id == new_latest_lineage_id
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pyte... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | suggestion | 92 | 37 | 43 | false | CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,002 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py
PR Title: CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: @pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("optimized_path", [True, False])
async def ... | does `get_mempool_item()` not return deferred items?
It's not obvious that this is correct. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
new_mi1 = mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(mi1.spend_bundle_name)
assert new_mi1 is not None
latest_singleton_lineage1 = new_mi1.bundle_coin_spends[version1_id].latest_singleton_lineage
assert latest_singleton_lineage1 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage1.coin_id == new_latest_lineage_id
... | I think it would be great to paramaterize this test on the condition as well, to cover `ASSERT_HEIGHT_RELATIVE`, `ASSERT_SECONDS_ABSOLUTE` and `ASSERT_SECONDS_RELATIVE` | new_mi1 = mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(mi1.spend_bundle_name)
assert new_mi1 is not None
latest_singleton_lineage1 = new_mi1.bundle_coin_spends[version1_id].latest_singleton_lineage
assert latest_singleton_lineage1 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage1.coin_id == new_latest_lineage_id
... | @@ -3260,3 +3261,41 @@ async def test_different_ff_versions() -> None:
latest_singleton_lineage2 = new_mi2.bundle_coin_spends[version2_id].latest_singleton_lineage
assert latest_singleton_lineage2 is not None
assert latest_singleton_lineage2.coin_id == new_latest_lineage_id
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pyte... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 168 | 49 | 51 | false | CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,002 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool_manager.py
PR Title: CHIA-3706 Cover new peak returning added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: new_mi1 = mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(mi1.spend_bundle_name)
assert new_mi... | I think it would be great to paramaterize this test on the condition as well, to cover `ASSERT_HEIGHT_RELATIVE`, `ASSERT_SECONDS_ABSOLUTE` and `ASSERT_SECONDS_RELATIVE` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
@kw_only_dataclass
class DIDUpdateMetadata(TransactionEndpointRequest):
wallet_id: uint32 = field(default_factory=default_raise)
metadata: dict[str, str] = field(default_factory=dict)
@streamable
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class DIDUpdateMetadataResponse(TransactionEndpointResponse):
spend_bundle: WalletSpen... | I think if the elif explicitly specifies `is None` it resolves this
`elif self.extra_delta is None or self.tail_reveal is None or self.tail_solution is None:`
| amount: Optional[uint64] = None
inner_address: Optional[str] = None
memos: Optional[list[str]] = None
coins: Optional[list[Coin]] = None
extra_delta: Optional[str] = None # str to support negative ints :(
tail_reveal: Optional[bytes] = None
tail_solution: Optional[bytes] = None
def __p... | @@ -1388,6 +1388,61 @@ class CombineCoinsResponse(TransactionEndpointResponse):
pass
+# utility for CATSpend
+# unfortunate that we can't use CreateCoin but the memos are taken as strings not bytes
+@streamable
+@dataclass(frozen=True)
+class Addition(Streamable):
+ amount: uint64
+ puzzle_hash: bytes32
... | chia/wallet/wallet_request_types.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 159 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3605] Port `cat_spend` to `@marshal` | 20,007 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | geoffwalmsley | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/wallet/wallet_request_types.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3605] Port `cat_spend` to `@marshal`
BEFORE CODE: @kw_only_dataclass
class DIDUpdateMetadata(TransactionEndpointRequest):
wallet_id: uint32 = field(default_factory=default_raise)
metadata: dict[str, s... | I think if the elif explicitly specifies `is None` it resolves this
`elif self.extra_delta is None or self.tail_reveal is None or self.tail_solution is None:`
| You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
start_service=start_services,
)
)
if start_services:
farmer_peer = UnresolvedPeerInfo(block_tools.config["self_hostname"], farmer_service._server.get_port())
else:
farmer_peer = None
harvester_services = [
await async_exit_s... | did the solver used to connect to the farmer? | b_tools: Optional[BlockTools],
b_tools_1: Optional[BlockTools],
connect_to_daemon: bool,
consensus_constants: ConsensusConstants,
db_version: int,
keychain1: Keychain,
keychain2: Keychain,
shared_b_tools: BlockTools,
) -> AsyncIterator[FullSystem]:
config_overrides = {"full_node.max_... | @@ -386,7 +388,6 @@ async def setup_farmer_multi_harvester_with_solver(
block_tools, # Pass BlockTools so SSL CA can be consistent
consensus_constants,
start_service=start_services,
- farmer_peer=farmer_peer, | chia/_tests/util/setup_nodes.py | 26 | Python | 0.143 | question | 45 | 51 | 51 | false | Farmer solver networking | 20,019 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/util/setup_nodes.py
PR Title: Farmer solver networking
BEFORE CODE: start_service=start_services,
)
)
if start_services:
farmer_peer = UnresolvedPeerInfo(block_tools.config["self_hostname"], f... | did the solver used to connect to the farmer? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
print("Node introducer updated")
change_made = True
except ValueError:
print("Node introducer address must be in format [IP:Port]")
if set_farmer_peer:
try:
host, port = parse_host_port(set_farmer_peer)
set_p... | does this work if you upgrade from a previous installation? It seems like the "solver" key may not exist in the config in that case, and this would throw a key error. Or are keys created automatically? | print("Node introducer updated")
change_made = True
except ValueError:
print("Node introducer address must be in format [IP:Port]")
if set_farmer_peer:
try:
host, port = parse_host_port(set_farmer_peer)
set_p... | @@ -59,6 +61,22 @@ def configure(
change_made = True
except ValueError:
print("Farmer address must be in format [IP:Port]")
+ if set_solver_peer:
+ try:
+ host, port = parse_host_port(set_solver_peer)
+ # Set single solver pe... | chia/cmds/configure.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | question | 201 | 51 | 51 | false | Farmer solver networking | 20,019 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/cmds/configure.py
PR Title: Farmer solver networking
BEFORE CODE: print("Node introducer updated")
change_made = True
except ValueError:
print("Node introducer address must be in format [IP:Port]... | does this work if you upgrade from a previous installation? It seems like the "solver" key may not exist in the config in that case, and this would throw a key error. Or are keys created automatically? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if seeder_domain_name is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["domain_name"] = seeder_domain_name
change_made = True
if seeder_nameserver is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["nameserver"] = seeder_nameserver
change_made = Tru... | If you have a setup with a farmer running on a separate machine, I imagine this has to be run on the farmer machine itself, right? | config["seeder"]["minimum_version_count"] = crawler_minimum_version_count
change_made = True
if seeder_domain_name is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["domain_name"] = seeder_domain_name
change_made = True
if seeder_nameserver is not Non... | @@ -237,6 +255,12 @@ def configure(
)
@click.option("--set-node-introducer", help="Set the introducer for node - IP:Port", type=str)
@click.option("--set-farmer-peer", help="Set the farmer peer for harvester - IP:Port", type=str)
+@click.option("--set-solver-peer", help="Set the solver peer for farmer - IP:Port", ty... | chia/cmds/configure.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | question | 130 | 51 | 51 | false | Farmer solver networking | 20,019 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/cmds/configure.py
PR Title: Farmer solver networking
BEFORE CODE: if seeder_domain_name is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["domain_name"] = seeder_domain_name
change_made = True
if seeder_nameserv... | If you have a setup with a farmer running on a separate machine, I imagine this has to be run on the farmer machine itself, right? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
if seeder_nameserver is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["nameserver"] = seeder_nameserver
change_made = True
if change_made:
print("Restart any running chia services for changes to take effect")
save_config(root_path, "config.yaml", con... | does this mean the solver only accepts connections from trusted farmers? or does it mean farmers only make connections to trusted solvers? I think this help message should clarify this.
I can see an argument for the trust needing to go both way. A malicious farmer can DoS a solver with tons of work. A malicious solv... | if seeder_domain_name is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["domain_name"] = seeder_domain_name
change_made = True
if seeder_nameserver is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["nameserver"] = seeder_nameserver
change_made = Tru... | @@ -237,6 +255,12 @@ def configure(
)
@click.option("--set-node-introducer", help="Set the introducer for node - IP:Port", type=str)
@click.option("--set-farmer-peer", help="Set the farmer peer for harvester - IP:Port", type=str)
+@click.option("--set-solver-peer", help="Set the solver peer for farmer - IP:Port", ty... | chia/cmds/configure.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | question | 375 | 51 | 51 | false | Farmer solver networking | 20,019 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/cmds/configure.py
PR Title: Farmer solver networking
BEFORE CODE:
if seeder_nameserver is not None and "seeder" in config:
config["seeder"]["nameserver"] = seeder_nameserver
change_made = True
if change_made:
... | does this mean the solver only accepts connections from trusted farmers? or does it mean farmers only make connections to trusted solvers? I think this help message should clarify this.
I can see an argument for the trust needing to go both way. A malicious farmer can DoS a solver with tons of work. A malicious solv... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
@contextlib.asynccontextmanager
async def manage(self) -> AsyncIterator[None]:
try:
self.log.info("Starting solver service")
self.started = True
self.log.info("Solver service started successfully")
yield
finally:
self.log.info("Shuttin... | I would swap these check around, and make this log clearly state that we accepted a connection from an *untrusted* farmer | self.log.info("Solver initialization complete")
@contextlib.asynccontextmanager
async def manage(self) -> AsyncIterator[None]:
try:
self.log.info("Starting solver service")
self.started = True
self.log.info("Solver service started successfully")
y... | @@ -74,7 +75,14 @@ def get_connections(self, request_node_type: Optional[NodeType]) -> list[dict[st
return default_get_connections(server=self.server, request_node_type=request_node_type)
async def on_connect(self, connection: WSChiaConnection) -> None:
- pass
+ if not self.config.get("tru... | chia/solver/solver.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | security | 121 | 41 | 47 | false | Farmer solver networking | 20,019 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/solver/solver.py
PR Title: Farmer solver networking
BEFORE CODE:
@contextlib.asynccontextmanager
async def manage(self) -> AsyncIterator[None]:
try:
self.log.info("Starting solver service")
self.started = True
... | I would swap these check around, and make this log clearly state that we accepted a connection from an *untrusted* farmer | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
logging.DEBUG if duration < 2 else logging.WARNING,
f"pre_validate_spendbundle took {duration:0.4f} seconds "
f"for {spend_bundle_id} (queue-size: {self._worker_queue_size})",
)
return sbc
async def add_spend_bundle(
self,
new_spend: SpendBundle,
... | I can't point to it directly but it's a little below, I think `conds` needs to be updated. | logging.DEBUG if duration < 2 else logging.WARNING,
f"pre_validate_spendbundle took {duration:0.4f} seconds "
f"for {spend_bundle_id} (queue-size: {self._worker_queue_size})",
)
return sbc
async def add_spend_bundle(
self,
new_spend: SpendBundle,
... | @@ -507,9 +501,11 @@ async def add_spend_bundle(
] = None,
) -> SpendBundleAddInfo:
"""
- Validates and adds to mempool a new_spend with the given NPCResult, and spend_name, and the current mempool.
- The mempool should be locked during this call (blockchain lock). If there are memp... | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | suggestion | 90 | 51 | 51 | false | remove unnecessary NPCResult in mempool_manager | 20,022 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: remove unnecessary NPCResult in mempool_manager
BEFORE CODE: logging.DEBUG if duration < 2 else logging.WARNING,
f"pre_validate_spendbundle took {duration:0.4f} seconds "
f"for {sp... | I can't point to it directly but it's a little below, I think `conds` needs to be updated. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
f"for {spend_bundle_id} (queue-size: {self._worker_queue_size})",
)
return sbc
async def add_spend_bundle(
self,
new_spend: SpendBundle,
conds: SpendBundleConditions,
spend_name: bytes32,
first_added_height: uint32,
get_coin_records: Optio... | We're only dealing with a single spend bundle, and in consistency with the rest of args docs I would make it:
```suggestion
conds: SpendBundleConditions resulting from running the clvm in the spend bundle's coin spends
``` | f"for {spend_bundle_id} (queue-size: {self._worker_queue_size})",
)
return sbc
async def add_spend_bundle(
self,
new_spend: SpendBundle,
conds: SpendBundleConditions,
spend_name: bytes32,
first_added_height: uint32,
get_coin_records: Optio... | @@ -507,14 +501,16 @@ async def add_spend_bundle(
] = None,
) -> SpendBundleAddInfo:
"""
- Validates and adds to mempool a new_spend with the given NPCResult, and spend_name, and the current mempool.
- The mempool should be locked during this call (blockchain lock). If there are mem... | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.786 | suggestion | 237 | 51 | 51 | false | remove unnecessary NPCResult in mempool_manager | 20,022 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: remove unnecessary NPCResult in mempool_manager
BEFORE CODE: f"for {spend_bundle_id} (queue-size: {self._worker_queue_size})",
)
return sbc
async def add_spend_bundle(
self,
... | We're only dealing with a single spend bundle, and in consistency with the rest of args docs I would make it:
```suggestion
conds: SpendBundleConditions resulting from running the clvm in the spend bundle's coin spends
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
spend_data=spend_data,
fast_forward_spends=self.fast_forward_spends,
)
new_bundle_coin_spends[new_coin_spend.coin.name()] = BundleCoinSpend(
coin_spend=new_coin_spend,
eligible_for_dedup=spend_data.eligible_for_dedup,
... | ```suggestion
# get_conditions_from_spendbundle raises a ValueError with an error code
``` | spend_data=spend_data,
fast_forward_spends=self.fast_forward_spends,
)
new_bundle_coin_spends[new_coin_spend.coin.name()] = BundleCoinSpend(
coin_spend=new_coin_spend,
eligible_for_dedup=spend_data.eligible_for_dedup,
... | @@ -278,10 +278,10 @@ def process_fast_forward_spends(
# care about here is whether this call throws or not.
get_conditions_from_spendbundle(new_sb, mempool_item.conds.cost, constants, height)
# get_conditions_from_spendbundle raises a TypeError with an error code | chia/full_node/eligible_coin_spends.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 98 | 37 | 37 | false | bump chia_rs dependency | 20,023 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/eligible_coin_spends.py
PR Title: bump chia_rs dependency
BEFORE CODE: spend_data=spend_data,
fast_forward_spends=self.fast_forward_spends,
)
new_bundle_coin_spends[new_coin_spend.coin.name... | ```suggestion
# get_conditions_from_spendbundle raises a ValueError with an error code
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async def pre_validate_spendbundle(
self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBundleConditions:
"""
Errors are included within the cached_result.
This runs in another process so we don't block the m... | ```suggestion
# validate_clvm_and_signature raises a ValueError with an error code
``` |
async def pre_validate_spendbundle(
self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBundleConditions:
"""
Errors are included within the cached_result.
This runs in another process so we don't block the m... | @@ -467,10 +467,10 @@ async def pre_validate_spendbundle(
flags | MEMPOOL_MODE,
)
# validate_clvm_and_signature raises a TypeError with an error code | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 94 | 51 | 51 | false | bump chia_rs dependency | 20,023 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | altendky | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: bump chia_rs dependency
BEFORE CODE:
async def pre_validate_spendbundle(
self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBun... | ```suggestion
# validate_clvm_and_signature raises a ValueError with an error code
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
)
return spend_bundle
def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock) -> bool:
assert block1.finished_sub_slots == block2.finished_sub_slots, "Mismatch in finished_sub_slots"
assert block1.reward_chain_block == block2.reward_chain_block, "Mismatch in reward_chain_block"... | ```suggestion
"condition, error",
``` | )
return spend_bundle
def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock) -> bool:
assert block1.finished_sub_slots == block2.finished_sub_slots, "Mismatch in finished_sub_slots"
assert block1.reward_chain_block == block2.reward_chain_block, "Mismatch in reward_chain_block"... | @@ -3294,3 +3294,65 @@ def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock)
# Final assertion to check the entire block
assert block1 == block2, "The entire block objects are not identical"
return True
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+ "condition_and_error... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 43 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,044 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: )
return spend_bundle
def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBl... | ```suggestion
"condition, error",
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert block1.challenge_chain_sp_proof == block2.challenge_chain_sp_proof, "Mismatch in challenge_chain_sp_proof"
assert block1.reward_chain_sp_proof == block2.reward_chain_sp_proof, "Mismatch in reward_chain_sp_proof"
assert block1.total_iters == block2.total_iters, "Mismatch in total_iters"
assert blo... | ```suggestion
condition: ConditionOpcode, error: str,
``` | assert block1.challenge_chain_sp_proof == block2.challenge_chain_sp_proof, "Mismatch in challenge_chain_sp_proof"
assert block1.reward_chain_sp_proof == block2.reward_chain_sp_proof, "Mismatch in reward_chain_sp_proof"
assert block1.total_iters == block2.total_iters, "Mismatch in total_iters"
assert blo... | @@ -3294,3 +3294,65 @@ def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock)
# Final assertion to check the entire block
assert block1 == block2, "The entire block objects are not identical"
return True
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+ "condition_and_error... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.714 | suggestion | 63 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,044 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: assert block1.challenge_chain_sp_proof == block2.challenge_chain_sp_proof, "Mi... | ```suggestion
condition: ConditionOpcode, error: str,
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert block1.transactions_info == block2.transactions_info, "Mismatch in transactions_info"
assert block1.transactions_generator == block2.transactions_generator, "Mismatch in transactions_generator"
assert block1.transactions_generator_ref_list == block2.transactions_generator_ref_list
# Final assert... | I think this comment should more directly say what *feature* is being tested and maybe which *cases* are covered. It's the `PendingTXCache`, right? | assert block1.transactions_info == block2.transactions_info, "Mismatch in transactions_info"
assert block1.transactions_generator == block2.transactions_generator, "Mismatch in transactions_generator"
assert block1.transactions_generator_ref_list == block2.transactions_generator_ref_list
# Final assert... | @@ -3294,3 +3294,65 @@ def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock)
# Final assertion to check the entire block
assert block1 == block2, "The entire block objects are not identical"
return True
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+ "condition_and_error... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | performance | 147 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,044 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: assert block1.transactions_info == block2.transactions_info, "Mismatch in tran... | I think this comment should more directly say what *feature* is being tested and maybe which *cases* are covered. It's the `PendingTXCache`, right? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
)
for block in blocks:
await full_node_api.full_node.add_block(block)
peak = full_node_api.full_node.blockchain.get_peak()
assert peak is not None
current_height = peak.height
# Create a transaction with a height condition that makes it pending
coin = ... | ```suggestion
# Advance peak to meet the condition
``` | )
for block in blocks:
await full_node_api.full_node.add_block(block)
peak = full_node_api.full_node.blockchain.get_peak()
assert peak is not None
current_height = peak.height
# Create a transaction with a height condition that makes it pending
coin = ... | @@ -3294,3 +3294,62 @@ def compare_unfinished_blocks(block1: UnfinishedBlock, block2: UnfinishedBlock)
# Final assertion to check the entire block
assert block1 == block2, "The entire block objects are not identical"
return True
+
+
+@pytest.mark.anyio
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+ "condition, error",
... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 64 | 35 | 35 | false | CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions | 20,044 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3731 Cover peak post processing w.r.t. added transactions as a result of retrying potential transactions
BEFORE CODE: )
for block in blocks:
await full_node_api.full_node.a... | ```suggestion
# Advance peak to meet the condition
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
return False
def get_signage_point(self, cc_signage_point: bytes32) -> Optional[SignagePoint]:
assert len(self.finished_sub_slots) >= 1
if cc_signage_point == self.constants.GENESIS_CHALLENGE:
return SignagePoint(None, None, None, None)
for sub_slot, sps, _ in self.fini... | Are there any scenarios, like with unfinished blocks, that this will make the genesis challenge a valid challenge? I'm not familiar with all the scenarios in which sub_slot may be None. It might seem like a small stylistic tweak, but I would be inclined to make the if branch be the "sub_slot is None" because it makes i... | return False
def get_signage_point(self, cc_signage_point: bytes32) -> Optional[SignagePoint]:
assert len(self.finished_sub_slots) >= 1
if cc_signage_point == self.constants.GENESIS_CHALLENGE:
return SignagePoint(None, None, None, None)
for sub_slot, sps, _ in self.fini... | @@ -833,10 +833,12 @@ def get_signage_point_by_index_and_cc_output(
self, cc_signage_point: bytes32, challenge: bytes32, index: uint8
) -> Optional[SignagePoint]:
assert len(self.finished_sub_slots) >= 1
- if cc_signage_point == self.constants.GENESIS_CHALLENGE:
- return Signage... | chia/full_node/full_node_store.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 617 | 51 | 51 | false | fix sp lookup at genesis | 20,057 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | trgarrett | almogdepaz | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_store.py
PR Title: fix sp lookup at genesis
BEFORE CODE: return False
def get_signage_point(self, cc_signage_point: bytes32) -> Optional[SignagePoint]:
assert len(self.finished_sub_slots) >= 1
if cc_signage... | Are there any scenarios, like with unfinished blocks, that this will make the genesis challenge a valid challenge? I'm not familiar with all the scenarios in which sub_slot may be None. It might seem like a small stylistic tweak, but I would be inclined to make the if branch be the "sub_slot is None" because it makes i... | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
self.cancel_tasks()
except Exception:
error_stack = traceback.format_exc()
self.log.warning(f"Exception closing socket: {error_stack}")
raise
finally:
with log_exceptions(self.log, consume=True):
if self.close_callback is not No... | I imagine this is supposed to be used but I don't see that anywhere. | self.cancel_tasks()
except Exception:
error_stack = traceback.format_exc()
self.log.warning(f"Exception closing socket: {error_stack}")
raise
finally:
with log_exceptions(self.log, consume=True):
if self.close_callback is not No... | @@ -358,6 +358,12 @@ async def ban_peer_bad_protocol(self, log_err_msg: str) -> None:
self.log.error(f"Banning peer for {ban_seconds} seconds: {self.peer_info.host} {log_err_msg}")
await self.close(ban_seconds, WSCloseCode.PROTOCOL_ERROR, Err.INVALID_PROTOCOL_MESSAGE)
+ async def ban_peer_consens... | chia/server/ws_connection.py | 26 | Python | 0.286 | suggestion | 69 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction() | 20,063 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/server/ws_connection.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction()
BEFORE CODE: self.cancel_tasks()
except Exception:
error_stack = traceback.format_exc()
self.log.warning(f"Exception closing socket: {erro... | I imagine this is supposed to be used but I don't see that anywhere. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBundleConditions:
"""
Errors are included within the cached_result.
This runs in another process so we don't block the main thread
"""
if spend_... | Is this the only value to warn with here, assuming it's left intentionally? | self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBundleConditions:
"""
Errors are included within the cached_result.
This runs in another process so we don't block the main thread
"""
if spend_... | @@ -460,6 +460,7 @@ async def pre_validate_spendbundle(
)
# validate_clvm_and_signature raises a ValueError with an error code
except ValueError as e:
+ log.warning(f"max CLVM cost: {self.max_tx_clvm_cost}") | chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py | 26 | Python | 0.214 | question | 75 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction() | 20,063 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/mempool_manager.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction()
BEFORE CODE: self, spend_bundle: SpendBundle, spend_bundle_id: Optional[bytes32] = None, bls_cache: Optional[BLSCache] = None
) -> SpendBundleConditions:
"""... | Is this the only value to warn with here, assuming it's left intentionally? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
full_node_1, _server_1, bt = one_node_one_block
blocks = await full_node_1.get_all_full_blocks()
start_height = blocks[-1].height if len(blocks) > 0 else -1
blocks = bt.get_consecutive_blocks(
3,
block_list_input=blocks,
guarantee_transaction_block=Tru... | The `ack.status` value should stay exactly as it was, AFAICS:
```suggestion
assert ack.status == MempoolInclusionStatus.FAILED.value
assert "chia.util.errors.ValidationError: Error code: BAD_AGGREGATE_SIGNATURE" in caplog.text
``` | blocks = bt.get_consecutive_blocks(
3,
block_list_input=blocks,
guarantee_transaction_block=True,
farmer_reward_puzzle_hash=reward_ph,
pool_reward_puzzle_hash=reward_ph,
)
await add_blocks_in_batches(blocks, full_node_1.full_node)
... | @@ -716,11 +719,12 @@ async def test_invalid_signature(
sb: SpendBundle = generate_test_spend_bundle(wallet_a, coin1)
assert sb.aggregated_signature != G2Element.generator()
sb = sb.replace(aggregated_signature=G2Element.generator())
+ caplog.clear()
res: Optional[Message] = a... | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py | 26 | Python | 1 | bug | 250 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction() | 20,063 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_mempool.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction()
BEFORE CODE: full_node_1, _server_1, bt = one_node_one_block
blocks = await full_node_1.get_all_full_blocks()
start_height = blocks[-1].height if ... | The `ack.status` value should stay exactly as it was, AFAICS:
```suggestion
assert ack.status == MempoolInclusionStatus.FAILED.value
assert "chia.util.errors.ValidationError: Error code: BAD_AGGREGATE_SIGNATURE" in caplog.text
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
"node_id": con.peer_node_id,
"creation_time": con.creation_time,
"bytes_read": con.bytes_read,
"bytes_written": con.bytes_written,
"last_message_time": con.last_message_time,
"peak_height": peak_height,
"peak... | I would differentiate this log entry from the `Exception` one below. Something like:
```suggestion
self.log.exception("Validation error in _handle_one_transaction, closing")
``` | "node_id": con.peer_node_id,
"creation_time": con.creation_time,
"bytes_read": con.bytes_read,
"bytes_written": con.bytes_written,
"last_message_time": con.last_message_time,
"peak_height": peak_height,
"peak... | @@ -503,11 +503,16 @@ async def _handle_one_transaction(self, entry: TransactionQueueEntry) -> None:
except asyncio.CancelledError:
error_stack = traceback.format_exc()
self.log.debug(f"Cancelling _handle_one_transaction, closing: {error_stack}")
+ except ValidationError as e:
... | chia/full_node/full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.857 | suggestion | 192 | 51 | 51 | false | [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction() | 20,063 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | AmineKhaldi | arvidn | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node.py
PR Title: [CHIA-3712] simplify add_transaction()
BEFORE CODE: "node_id": con.peer_node_id,
"creation_time": con.creation_time,
"bytes_read": con.bytes_read,
"bytes_writ... | I would differentiate this log entry from the `Exception` one below. Something like:
```suggestion
self.log.exception("Validation error in _handle_one_transaction, closing")
``` | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
def test_process_fast_forward_spends_nothing_to_do() -> None:
"""
This tests the case when we don't have an eligible coin, so there is
nothing to fast forward and the item remains unchanged
"""
sk = AugSchemeMPL.key_gen(b"b" * 32)
g1 = sk.get_g1()
sig = AugSchemeMPL.sign(sk, b"foobar", g1)... | I would expect this test to still have the same behavior. Removing it looks a bit suspicious, as if we expect different behavior now. Does this test fail with your changes? |
def test_process_fast_forward_spends_nothing_to_do() -> None:
"""
This tests the case when we don't have an eligible coin, so there is
nothing to fast forward and the item remains unchanged
"""
sk = AugSchemeMPL.key_gen(b"b" * 32)
g1 = sk.get_g1()
sig = AugSchemeMPL.sign(sk, b"foobar", g1)... | @@ -63,28 +63,6 @@ def test_process_fast_forward_spends_nothing_to_do() -> None:
assert bundle_coin_spends == original_version.bundle_coin_spends
-def test_process_fast_forward_spends_unknown_ff() -> None: | chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_singleton_fast_forward.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | bug | 172 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3737 Simplify BundleCoinSpend's tracking of fast forward spends | 20,069 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/mempool/test_singleton_fast_forward.py
PR Title: CHIA-3737 Simplify BundleCoinSpend's tracking of fast forward spends
BEFORE CODE:
def test_process_fast_forward_spends_nothing_to_do() -> None:
"""
This tests the case when we don't ha... | I would expect this test to still have the same behavior. Removing it looks a bit suspicious, as if we expect different behavior now. Does this test fail with your changes? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
test_condition_valid_times,
),
],
}
test_rpc_clients.wallet_rpc_client.check_log(expected_calls)
def test_vcs_approve_r_cats(capsys: object, get_test_cli_clients: tuple[TestRpcClients, Path]) -> None:
test_rpc_clients, root_dir = get_test_cli_clients
# set RPC Clie... | I wonder why this parameter, which is not part of `request`, is between other parameters which are. Not very important, but a curiosity. | True,
test_condition_valid_times,
),
],
}
test_rpc_clients.wallet_rpc_client.check_log(expected_calls)
def test_vcs_approve_r_cats(capsys: object, get_test_cli_clients: tuple[TestRpcClients, Path]) -> None:
test_rpc_clients, root_dir = get_test_cli_clien... | @@ -335,25 +336,23 @@ def test_vcs_approve_r_cats(capsys: object, get_test_cli_clients: tuple[TestRpcC
class VcsApproveRCATSRpcClient(TestWalletRpcClient):
async def crcat_approve_pending(
self,
- wallet_id: uint32,
- min_amount_to_claim: uint64,
+ request: CR... | chia/_tests/cmds/wallet/test_vcs.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | suggestion | 136 | 51 | 51 | false | [LABS-249] Port `crcat_approve_pending` to `@marshal` | 20,116 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | richardkiss | Quexington | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/cmds/wallet/test_vcs.py
PR Title: [LABS-249] Port `crcat_approve_pending` to `@marshal`
BEFORE CODE: test_condition_valid_times,
),
],
}
test_rpc_clients.wallet_rpc_client.check_log(expected_calls)
def ... | I wonder why this parameter, which is not part of `request`, is between other parameters which are. Not very important, but a curiosity. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
return None
@metadata.request(peer_required=True)
async def new_transaction(
self, transaction: full_node_protocol.NewTransaction, peer: WSChiaConnection
) -> Optional[Message]:
"""
A peer notifies us of a new transaction.
Requests a full transaction if we haven't s... | you should check the fee here too |
return None
@metadata.request(peer_required=True)
async def new_transaction(
self, transaction: full_node_protocol.NewTransaction, peer: WSChiaConnection
) -> Optional[Message]:
"""
A peer notifies us of a new transaction.
Requests a full transaction if we haven't s... | @@ -170,8 +170,15 @@ async def new_transaction(
if not (await self.full_node.synced()):
return None
- # Ignore if already seen
- if self.full_node.mempool_manager.seen(transaction.transaction_id):
+ # If already seen, make sure the cost matches, otherwise ban the peer
+ ... | chia/full_node/full_node_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.143 | suggestion | 33 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already | 20,140 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_api.py
PR Title: CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already
BEFORE CODE:
return None
@metadata.request(peer_required=True)
async def new_transaction(
... | you should check the fee here too | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
# Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pending=False) is not None
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("misma... | where did `bt` come from?
Are you sure it will generate valid blocks on top of the chain in `node_to_add_tx_to`? | # Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pending=False) is not None
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_cost", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_fee", [True, F... | @@ -3357,3 +3358,61 @@ async def test_pending_tx_cache_retry_on_new_peak(
assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
# Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pe... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.5 | question | 112 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already | 20,140 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already
BEFORE CODE: assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
... | where did `bt` come from?
Are you sure it will generate valid blocks on top of the chain in `node_to_add_tx_to`? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_cost", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_fee", [True, False])
async def test_ban_for_mismatched_tx_cost_fee(
setup_two_nodes_fixture: tuple[list[FullNodeSimulator], list[tuple[WalletNode, ChiaServer]], BlockTools],
self_hostname: str,
mi... | the name of this function, `generate_and_send_tx()` seems misleading. You also generate blocks and add them to the chain.
It's also only called from one place, so there might be a better line to cut along to pull out a function | @pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_cost", [True, False])
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_fee", [True, False])
async def test_ban_for_mismatched_tx_cost_fee(
setup_two_nodes_fixture: tuple[list[FullNodeSimulator], list[tuple[WalletNode, ChiaServer]], BlockTools],
self_hostname: str,
mis... | @@ -3357,3 +3358,61 @@ async def test_pending_tx_cache_retry_on_new_peak(
assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
# Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pe... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 227 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already | 20,140 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already
BEFORE CODE:
@pytest.mark.anyio
@pytest.mark.parametrize("mismatch_cost", [True, False])
@pyte... | the name of this function, `generate_and_send_tx()` seems misleading. You also generate blocks and add them to the chain.
It's also only called from one place, so there might be a better line to cut along to pull out a function | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
sb_name = sb.name()
# Send the transaction
res = await full_node_api.send_transaction(SendTransaction(sb))
assert res is not None
assert ProtocolMessageTypes(res.type) == ProtocolMessageTypes.transaction_ack
transaction_ack = TransactionAck.from_bytes(res.data)
as... | I think you only need one node, don't you? | # Send the transaction
res = await full_node_api.send_transaction(SendTransaction(sb))
assert res is not None
assert ProtocolMessageTypes(res.type) == ProtocolMessageTypes.transaction_ack
transaction_ack = TransactionAck.from_bytes(res.data)
assert transaction_ack.status ... | @@ -3357,3 +3358,61 @@ async def test_pending_tx_cache_retry_on_new_peak(
assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
# Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pe... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.071 | question | 42 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already | 20,140 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already
BEFORE CODE: sb_name = sb.name()
# Send the transaction
res = await ful... | I think you only need one node, don't you? | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
coin = blocks[-1].get_included_reward_coins()[0]
spend_bundle = wallet.generate_signed_transaction(uint64(42), wallet_ph, coin)
sb_name = spend_bundle.name()
await node_to_add_tx_to.add_transaction(spend_bundle, sb_name, ws_con)
mempool_item = node_to_add_tx_to.mempool_manager.ge... | you need an else block here, to make sure the peer is *not* banned. e.g. if the peer is *always* banned, this test would still pass right now | 3, guarantee_transaction_block=True, farmer_reward_puzzle_hash=wallet_ph, pool_reward_puzzle_hash=wallet_ph
)
for block in blocks:
await full_node_1.full_node.add_block(block)
# Create a transaction and add it to the relevant full node's mempool
coin = blocks[-1].get_included_reward_coin... | @@ -3357,3 +3358,61 @@ async def test_pending_tx_cache_retry_on_new_peak(
assert f"Added transaction to mempool: {sb_name}\n" in caplog.text
# Make sure the transaction was retried and got added to the mempool
assert full_node_api.full_node.mempool_manager.get_mempool_item(sb_name, include_pe... | chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.357 | suggestion | 141 | 32 | 30 | false | CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already | 20,140 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/_tests/core/full_node/test_full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3779 Make sure the costs and fees match when a peer notifies us of a new transaction that we saw already
BEFORE CODE: coin = blocks[-1].get_included_reward_coins()[0]
spend_bundle = wa... | you need an else block here, to make sure the peer is *not* banned. e.g. if the peer is *always* banned, this test would still pass right now | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
async def tx_request_and_timeout(full_node: FullNode, transaction_id: bytes32, task_id: bytes32) -> None:
counter = 0
try:
while True:
# Limit to asking a few peers, it's possible that this tx got included on chain already
... | I don't think it's safe to assume you will have received and ingested the transaction at this point. I think the only way to do this reliably is to pass along the peer, cost and fee with the transaction request, to be able to tie it back to the sender immediately after having validated it. | @metadata.request(peer_required=True)
async def new_transaction(
self, transaction: full_node_protocol.NewTransaction, peer: WSChiaConnection
) -> Optional[Message]:
"""
A peer notifies us of a new transaction.
Requests a full transaction if we haven't seen it previously, and... | @@ -226,8 +226,16 @@ async def tx_request_and_timeout(full_node: FullNode, transaction_id: bytes32, t
await random_peer.send_message(msg)
await asyncio.sleep(5)
counter += 1
- if full_node.mempool_manager.seen(transaction_... | chia/full_node/full_node_api.py | 26 | Python | 0.429 | suggestion | 290 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle | 20,166 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node_api.py
PR Title: CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle
BEFORE CODE: async def tx_request_and_timeout(full_node: FullNode, transaction_id: bytes32,... | I don't think it's safe to assume you will have received and ingested the transaction at this point. I think the only way to do this reliably is to pass along the peer, cost and fee with the transaction request, to be able to tie it back to the sender immediately after having validated it. | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
transaction, cost_result, spend_name, self.mempool_manager.peak.height
)
status = info.status
error = info.error
if status == MempoolInclusionStatus.SUCCESS:
self.log.debug(
f"Added transaction to mempool: {spend_name} mempool size:... | I think `CONSENSUS_ERROR_BAN_SECONDS` is pretty reasonable here. disagreeing on cost or fee is a consensus issue. and I think if you see rate limiter in the log, you won't think of this case | return MempoolInclusionStatus.FAILED, Err.MEMPOOL_NOT_INITIALIZED
info = await self.mempool_manager.add_spend_bundle(
transaction, cost_result, spend_name, self.mempool_manager.peak.height
)
status = info.status
error = info.error
i... | @@ -2810,10 +2817,23 @@ async def add_transaction(
f"{self.mempool_manager.mempool.total_mempool_cost() / 5000000}"
)
- # Only broadcast successful transactions, not pending ones. Otherwise it's a DOS
- # vector.
mempool_item = self.mempool_manager.get_... | chia/full_node/full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.643 | suggestion | 190 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle | 20,166 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle
BEFORE CODE: transaction, cost_result, spend_name, self.mempool_manager.peak.height
... | I think `CONSENSUS_ERROR_BAN_SECONDS` is pretty reasonable here. disagreeing on cost or fee is a consensus issue. and I think if you see rate limiter in the log, you won't think of this case | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
uint8(0),
uint32(0) if peak is None else peak.height,
tx_peak.height if tx_peak is not None else uint32(0),
sp_source_data=SignagePointSourceData(
sub_slot_data=SPSubSlotSourceData(
end_of... | I take it the tuple of `uint64` is cost and fee. Since you use a tuple instead of a class with named fields, I think it would be good to have a comment indicating which one is which | uint8(0),
uint32(0) if peak is None else peak.height,
tx_peak.height if tx_peak is not None else uint32(0),
sp_source_data=SignagePointSourceData(
sub_slot_data=SPSubSlotSourceData(
end_of... | @@ -2761,7 +2763,12 @@ async def add_end_of_sub_slot(
return None, False
async def add_transaction(
- self, transaction: SpendBundle, spend_name: bytes32, peer: Optional[WSChiaConnection] = None, test: bool = False
+ self,
+ transaction: SpendBundle,
+ spend_name: bytes32,
+ ... | chia/full_node/full_node.py | 26 | Python | 0.571 | suggestion | 181 | 51 | 51 | false | CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle | 20,166 | Chia-Network/chia-blockchain | 10,822 | Python | arvidn | AmineKhaldi | Review this pull request change.
Language: Python
File: chia/full_node/full_node.py
PR Title: CHIA-3787 Make sure the fee and cost specified in a NewTransaction match the ones from validating its spend bundle
BEFORE CODE: uint8(0),
uint32(0) if peak is None else peak.height,
... | I take it the tuple of `uint64` is cost and fee. Since you use a tuple instead of a class with named fields, I think it would be good to have a comment indicating which one is which | You are an expert software engineer and code reviewer. Review pull requests carefully for correctness, bugs, security issues, performance problems, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity. Only raise actionable issues supported by the code. Explain why an issue matters and suggest a concrete fix when appropriate. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.