Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: bls improvements and other fixes #251

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
May 21, 2024

Conversation

HashEngineering
Copy link
Collaborator

@HashEngineering HashEngineering commented Apr 29, 2024

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

What was done?

  • Use Lazy BLS keys and signatures in Quorums/Final Commitment.
  • Remove auto generated protobuf
  • Change method of retry on get enlists

How Has This Been Tested?

Breaking Changes

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation

For repository code-owners and collaborators only

  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone

@HashEngineering HashEngineering self-assigned this Apr 29, 2024
@HashEngineering HashEngineering changed the title Feature bls improvements feat: bls improvements and other fixes May 3, 2024
Comment on lines +764 to +772
if (version != MIN_STANDARD_VERSION) {
if (getVersionShort() == SPECIAL_VERSION) {
s.append(indent).append("version: ").append(getVersionShort()).append('\n');
Type type = (getVersionShort() == SPECIAL_VERSION) ? getType() : Type.TRANSACTION_NORMAL;
s.append(" type: ").append(type.toString()).append('(').append(type.getValue()).append(")\n");
} else {
s.append(indent).append("version: ").append(version).append('\n');
}
}
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

a cleaner way to print the version for a transaction

@HashEngineering HashEngineering marked this pull request as ready for review May 21, 2024 00:48
Comment on lines 714 to 728
peer.sendMessage(lastRequest.getRequestMessage());

if (retryFuture != null) {
log.info("sendMessageFuture cancel: {}", lastRequest.request.getClass().getSimpleName());
retryFuture.cancel(true);
retryFuture = null;
}
retryFuture = scheduledExecutorService.schedule(() -> {
if (!lastRequest.getReceived()) {
log.info("sendMessageFuture check: last request not received {}", lastRequest.request.getClass().getSimpleName());
retryLastRequest(peer, new TimeoutException("last request not received"));
} else {
log.info("sendMessageFuture check: last request received {}", lastRequest.request.getClass().getSimpleName());
}
}, 10, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the new means of retry instead of using a ListenableFuture

Copy link
Member

@Syn-McJ Syn-McJ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good

@HashEngineering HashEngineering merged commit 0390ace into master May 21, 2024
7 checks passed
@HashEngineering HashEngineering deleted the feature-bls-improvements branch June 25, 2024 15:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants