You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our current nodeData design suffers from volatility issues in our distributed network environment. Specifically:
Data Inconsistency: Nodes in the network may have conflicting or outdated information about other nodes, leading to inconsistent network state across the system.
Data Loss: When nodes restart or temporarily disconnect, they may lose valuable information about the network state, impacting the overall system reliability.
Lack of Single Source of Truth: There's no authoritative source for node information, making it difficult to resolve conflicts and ensure data accuracy.
Inefficient Data Propagation: The current system lacks an efficient mechanism to propagate node updates across the network, potentially leading to stale data and increased network overhead.
Scalability Concerns: As the network grows, the current design may not efficiently handle hundreds of nodes, potentially causing performance degradation.
Limited Persistence: The current system doesn't have robust persistence mechanisms, making it challenging to recover the network state after system-wide failures.
Objectives:
Research and design a robust data consistency and persistence system for our distributed node network.
Evaluate the feasibility of implementing a central authority node using a multiaddress approach.
Explore efficient mechanisms for local caching, periodic synchronization, and gossip protocols.
Consider thread-safety, efficient data structures, and conflict resolution strategies.
Assess the impact of the proposed changes on the existing codebase and identify integration points.
Acceptance Criteria:
A high-level design document outlining the proposed solution, including:
CentralAuthority struct and its responsibilities
Updated NodeEventTracker design
Data flow and synchronization mechanisms
Conflict resolution strategies
Persistence and recovery mechanisms
Proof-of-concept code demonstrating key components of the proposed solution
Analysis of potential performance impacts and scalability considerations
Identification of major risks and mitigation strategies
Estimation of effort required for full implementation
Outcome:
A comprehensive understanding of the problem space and a well-defined approach to address the nodeData volatility issues, setting the foundation for a more robust and scalable distributed network system.
==================================
Outcome:
High-Level Design Document:
a. CentralAuthority struct and its responsibilities:
Maintains an array of NodeData objects as the primary storage
Defined using a multiaddress to specify a single, well-known node as the authority
Provides methods for adding, updating, retrieving, and removing NodeData
Implements thread-safe operations using sync.RWMutex
Handles persistence of NodeData to allow recovery after restarts
b. Updated NodeEventTracker design:
Manages local copies of NodeData
Interacts with the CentralAuthority for data synchronization
Implements local caching for fast data access
Provides methods for updating local cache and triggering synchronization with CentralAuthority
c. Data flow and synchronization mechanisms:
Gossip protocol integrated with existing pubsub system for quick distribution of updates
Periodic synchronization between nodes and the central authority
Methods for non-authority nodes to fetch data from the central authority
d. Conflict resolution strategies:
Implement a merge function for NodeData that resolves conflicts and inconsistencies
Use timestamps and version numbers to determine the most up-to-date information
e. Persistence and recovery mechanisms:
Implement efficient JSON marshaling/unmarshaling for data persistence
Periodic saving of NodeData to disk
Recovery mechanisms to reload data after node restarts
Proof-of-Concept Code:
// CentralAuthority structtypeCentralAuthoritystruct {
nodes []NodeDatamu sync.RWMutexdataFilestringmultiaddr multiaddr.Multiaddr
}
// NodeEventTracker structtypeNodeEventTrackerstruct {
localCachemap[peer.ID]NodeDatacentralAuth*CentralAuthoritypubsub*pubsub.PubSub// ... other fields
}
// Merge function for NodeDatafuncmergeNodeData(old, newNodeData) NodeData {
// Implementation of merge logic
}
// Gossip protocol integrationfunc (net*NodeEventTracker) handleGossipMessage(msg*pubsub.Message) {
// Handle incoming gossip messages
}
// Persistence methodsfunc (ca*CentralAuthority) saveData() error {
// Save data to disk
}
func (ca*CentralAuthority) loadData() error {
// Load data from disk
}
// Helper function for determining central authorityfuncisCentralAuthority(nodeAddr, authorityAddr multiaddr.Multiaddr) bool {
// Compare node address with authority address
}
Performance and Scalability Analysis:
The use of a central authority provides a single source of truth, improving consistency
Local caching in each node reduces network overhead and improves read performance
The gossip protocol allows for efficient propagation of updates in large networks
Periodic synchronization helps maintain eventual consistency across the network
The solution should scale well to hundreds of nodes, with the central authority being the potential bottleneck
Major Risks and Mitigation Strategies:
Risk: Central authority becomes a single point of failure
Mitigation: Implement a failover mechanism or consider a multi-authority approach
Risk: Network partitions may lead to inconsistent states
Mitigation: Implement conflict resolution strategies and eventual consistency mechanisms
Risk: High network overhead during synchronization
Mitigation: Optimize synchronization frequency and implement delta updates
This solution addresses the current data volatility issues by providing a centralized authority, implementing efficient synchronization mechanisms, and ensuring data persistence. It can be integrated into the existing codebase by updating the NodeEventTracker and introducing the CentralAuthority component.
The design considers efficient searching and updating of NodeData, handles concurrent updates, ensures data consistency, minimizes network overhead, and provides graceful handling of node joins and leaves. It also addresses proper handling of the central authority role and considers edge cases such as network partitions or temporary unavailability of the central authority node.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
teslashibe
changed the title
spike:
spike: Investigate and Design a Solution for NodeData Volatility
Oct 10, 2024
Problem Statement:
Our current nodeData design suffers from volatility issues in our distributed network environment. Specifically:
Data Inconsistency: Nodes in the network may have conflicting or outdated information about other nodes, leading to inconsistent network state across the system.
Data Loss: When nodes restart or temporarily disconnect, they may lose valuable information about the network state, impacting the overall system reliability.
Lack of Single Source of Truth: There's no authoritative source for node information, making it difficult to resolve conflicts and ensure data accuracy.
Inefficient Data Propagation: The current system lacks an efficient mechanism to propagate node updates across the network, potentially leading to stale data and increased network overhead.
Scalability Concerns: As the network grows, the current design may not efficiently handle hundreds of nodes, potentially causing performance degradation.
Limited Persistence: The current system doesn't have robust persistence mechanisms, making it challenging to recover the network state after system-wide failures.
Objectives:
Acceptance Criteria:
Outcome:
A comprehensive understanding of the problem space and a well-defined approach to address the nodeData volatility issues, setting the foundation for a more robust and scalable distributed network system.
==================================
Outcome:
a. CentralAuthority struct and its responsibilities:
b. Updated NodeEventTracker design:
c. Data flow and synchronization mechanisms:
d. Conflict resolution strategies:
e. Persistence and recovery mechanisms:
Performance and Scalability Analysis:
Major Risks and Mitigation Strategies:
Mitigation: Implement a failover mechanism or consider a multi-authority approach
Mitigation: Implement conflict resolution strategies and eventual consistency mechanisms
Mitigation: Optimize synchronization frequency and implement delta updates
This solution addresses the current data volatility issues by providing a centralized authority, implementing efficient synchronization mechanisms, and ensuring data persistence. It can be integrated into the existing codebase by updating the NodeEventTracker and introducing the CentralAuthority component.
The design considers efficient searching and updating of NodeData, handles concurrent updates, ensures data consistency, minimizes network overhead, and provides graceful handling of node joins and leaves. It also addresses proper handling of the central authority role and considers edge cases such as network partitions or temporary unavailability of the central authority node.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: