52d03d0071
post rebase fixes
2017-04-18 21:35:00 -04:00
29a893b193
update comment
2017-04-18 21:28:11 -04:00
cd9e9e9f45
s/ExecBlock/ValExecBlock/g; s/sm.ApplyBlock/sm.ExecCommitBlock/g
2017-04-18 21:28:10 -04:00
935f70a346
comments and cleanup
2017-04-18 21:28:10 -04:00
5109746b1c
Handshake uses ApplyBlock, no ConsensuState
2017-04-18 21:28:10 -04:00
1684ec163f
ABCIResponses not needed as field in state
2017-04-18 21:27:50 -04:00
3a973b80ac
update glide
2017-04-18 21:27:31 -04:00
cb279bf662
state: ABCIResponses, s.Save() in ApplyBlock
2017-04-18 21:27:31 -04:00
9d2de2b756
tx_indexer -> tx_index
2017-04-18 20:55:40 -04:00
45876d0828
NewBatch takes size, batch.Add doesn't use append
2017-04-18 20:23:58 -04:00
b6a04a3456
more fixes from review
2017-04-18 20:11:53 -04:00
f4d0076344
TxResult includes Tx. /tx only works if indexer active
2017-04-18 19:56:41 -04:00
d572bb0c5d
state/txindex and pkg per indexer impl
2017-04-18 19:29:02 -04:00
ffe6d58a58
add Height to ResultBroadcastTxCommit and EventDataTx
2017-04-12 18:33:48 -04:00
2a59cda77e
/tx returns tx bytes
2017-04-12 18:18:17 -04:00
7fbe8e47d4
fix tests
2017-04-10 17:32:48 -04:00
d7c5690f17
index by bytes. add TxID to broadcast_tx responses
2017-04-10 17:21:37 -04:00
3478de50a1
no need for map - tx responses should arrive in order (Refs #237 )
...
```
me: so we are executing them in order and receiving them in order and there is no way we could receive them out of order (due to network or something else), correct?
ebuchman: if we receive them out of order, ABCI is broken
ebuchman: so it is possible, if the ABCI server we're talking to is not implementing the spec
ebuchman: but that shouldn't justify us building a map
```
2017-04-10 22:44:08 +04:00
63704454a3
expose `/tx?hash="XXXXXXXXXXXX"` RPC call
2017-04-10 22:44:07 +04:00
b08f29cb71
add config option for tx indexing and disable it by default
2017-04-10 22:44:07 +04:00
d62e85757f
execution test
2017-04-10 22:44:07 +04:00
c3f1b08b6a
tx indexing (Refs #237 )
...
save transactions to blockstore
move to a separate module
benchmark KVIndexer
batch write transactions
Benchmarks:
```
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex-2 100000 516300 ns/op
PASS
ok github.com/tendermint/tendermint/blockchain/tx 56.506s
5,16 s for 10000 transactions
1 s for 2000 transactions
```
```
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex-2 h 3000000 8622 ns/op
PASS
ok github.com/tendermint/tendermint/blockchain/tx 34.210s
86 ms for 10000 transactions
16 ms for 2000 transactions
```
```
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex1-2 5000000 7160 ns/op
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex500-2 20000 1750411 ns/op
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex1000-2 10000 3573973 ns/op
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex2000-2 5000 7836851 ns/op
BenchmarkKVIndexerIndex10000-2 1000 33438980 ns/op
PASS
ok github.com/tendermint/tendermint/blockchain/tx 209.482s
7,8 ms for 2000 transactions
```
[state] write test for ApplyBlock
review comments
- move txindexer to state
- fix type
save Tx Index as well
do not store tx itself in the result
2017-04-10 22:44:07 +04:00
f9df4294f3
move some interfaces to types/services.go
2017-02-20 20:09:15 -05:00
0765613778
move handshake to consensus package
2017-02-20 19:52:36 -05:00
756213c5f5
check appHash
2017-02-20 17:08:38 -05:00
bc67859672
make ReplayBlocks logic exhaustive
2017-02-20 16:32:48 -05:00
44d472ddd3
comments from review
2017-02-18 22:15:59 -05:00
7228b11e3f
state: remove StateIntermediate
2017-02-17 19:13:35 -05:00
0bec99fbd4
consensus: handshake replay test using wal
2017-02-17 19:12:05 -05:00
3c5adebcd3
applyBlock to simplify replay of many blocks. still wip
2017-02-17 11:32:56 -05:00
6403b2f468
fixes for handshake replay through consensus
2017-02-17 10:51:05 -05:00
cbe6dbe7a1
handshake replay through consensus using mockApp
2017-02-16 17:56:45 -05:00
99b068b313
BlockMeta uses BlockID
2017-02-14 17:06:58 -05:00
67ab574e98
Cleanup, add stub for VerifyCommitAny
2017-01-29 13:50:53 -08:00
94b6dd65ee
AppendTx -> DeliverTx
2017-01-12 15:55:03 -05:00
c147b41013
TMSP -> ABCI
2017-01-12 15:53:32 -05:00
2dd7030579
tmsp: ResponseInfo and ResponseEndBlock
2017-01-12 15:21:20 -05:00
bae0bc02a6
consensus: be more explicit when we need to write height after handshake
2017-01-05 20:16:42 -08:00
0c01b0ded9
state.State and wal.writeHeight after handshake
2016-12-22 22:10:36 -05:00
0e7694ca94
state: AppHashIsStale -> IntermediateState
2016-12-22 15:01:22 -05:00
38783e7fa1
types: SignatureEd25519 -> Signature
2016-12-18 00:14:07 -05:00
2425711734
blockchain: use ApplyBlock
2016-12-06 23:01:55 -05:00
6f88d04ac4
call db.SetSync when necessary
2016-12-06 02:52:07 -08:00
4202c4bf20
Fix Merge pull request #319
2016-12-06 01:16:13 -08:00
b74a97a4f6
update grpc broadcast tx
2016-12-02 00:29:25 -05:00
0fe53dc5cf
remove privValIndex; Stale->AppHashIsStale
2016-12-02 00:27:36 -05:00
2f9063c1d6
consensus: test validator set change
2016-11-23 18:20:46 -05:00
5046d5b181
more handshake replay cleanup
2016-11-22 20:38:14 -05:00
e0db20c0cf
update privValidatorIndex on valset change
2016-11-22 20:38:14 -05:00
e1e2c1c740
cleanup ReplayBlocks
2016-11-22 20:38:14 -05:00
Ethan Buchman
Jae Kwon
Anton Kaliaev