Use the IPFS core object to post block data during proposal #178

evan-forbes · 2021-03-04T04:45:43Z

Description

Here's a rough draft for using the core IPFS object to post block data while proposing a block. This PR shows some of the difficulties that go with using an IPFS core object. The IPFS object is not initiated until OnStart is called, but we need to get the core object to where the block is being proposed. While hacky, if we simply add a field containing a IPFS core object to the consensus.State struct, then we can fill that field during Onstart, and have access to the ipfs object when the block is being proposed.

There is a second problem, which is that the erasure data is not cached. Unless we want to pass the IPFS object all the way to where we are first generating the erasure data, we have no way to access it. This PR simply generates the data again, but another option would be to cache the erasured data in the Block struct and use it from there.

As mentioned in #170, there's the option to not use the IPFS coreapi object and instead use some other IPFS client.

closes #185

liamsi

Great start 👍🏼 🚀

liamsi · 2021-03-04T22:20:40Z

types/block.go

@@ -259,6 +264,128 @@ func mustPush(rowTree *nmt.NamespacedMerkleTree, id namespace.ID, data []byte) {
 	}
 }

+func (b *Block) PutBlock(ctx context.Context, api ipfsapi.CoreAPI) error {


Should we pass in a NodeAdder instead of the whole API directly?

It looks like we can even just pass in a pinning NodeAdder: https://github.com/ipfs/interface-go-ipfs-core/blob/b935dfe5375eac7ea3c65b14b3f9a0242861d0b3/dag.go#L12
(which since 0.8.0 seems to use the data store directly instead of coupling it with the DAG - hence it got faster with the last release as far as I understand).

Nice! I didn't notice the Pinning method in the interface, that simplifies things a fair bit. 29244a0

referencing #167 s.t. we know that we are already pinning some of the data.

liamsi · 2021-03-04T22:23:20Z

types/block.go

+	extendedDataSquare, err := rsmt2d.ComputeExtendedDataSquare(shares, rsmt2d.RSGF8, rsmt2d.NewDefaultTree)
+	if err != nil {
+		panic(fmt.Sprintf("unexpected error: %v", err))
+	}
+
+	squareWidth := extendedDataSquare.Width()
+	originalDataWidth := squareWidth / 2
+
+	// add namespaces to erasured shares and chunk into tree sized portions
+	leaves := make([][][]byte, 2*squareWidth)
+	for outerIdx := uint(0); outerIdx < squareWidth; outerIdx++ {
+		rowLeaves := make([][]byte, squareWidth)
+		colLeaves := make([][]byte, squareWidth)
+		for innerIdx := uint(0); innerIdx < squareWidth; innerIdx++ {
+			if outerIdx < originalDataWidth && innerIdx < originalDataWidth {
+				rowShare := namespacedShares[outerIdx*originalDataWidth+innerIdx]
+				colShare := namespacedShares[innerIdx*originalDataWidth+outerIdx]
+				rowLeaves[innerIdx] = append(rowShare.NamespaceID(), rowShare.Data()...)
+				colLeaves[innerIdx] = append(colShare.NamespaceID(), colShare.Data()...)
+			} else {
+				rowData := extendedDataSquare.Row(outerIdx)
+				colData := extendedDataSquare.Column(outerIdx)
+				parityCellFromRow := rowData[innerIdx]
+				parityCellFromCol := colData[innerIdx]
+				rowLeaves[innerIdx] = append(copyOfParityNamespaceID(), parityCellFromRow...)
+				colLeaves[innerIdx] = append(copyOfParityNamespaceID(), parityCellFromCol...)
+			}
+		}
+		leaves[outerIdx] = rowLeaves
+		leaves[2*outerIdx] = colLeaves
+	}


Might be orthogonal to this PR but we should either refactor this s.t. this is not duplicated here, or, use only the rsmt2d lib for getting the row/column roots (the latter is preferable if it works) and to collect the ipfs nodes.

Or, we could also just use the NMT + a "node collector" function here directly and skip using DataSquareRowOrColumnRawInputParser).

https://github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/blob/899f5b23d738e6d0118fddfbd3c0410d2f562834/types/block.go#L213-L244

That is a good idea! I ended up refactoring out the redundant code. 5bfb03f I don't think we can use the rsmt2d libs, because we have to add the namespaces back to the data before generating the roots, but I could be missing something. We could definitely use the node collector in this package instead of DataSquarerowOrColumnRawInputParser, but I didn't for the time being in order not to export nmtNode from the plugin lib.

I don't think we can use the rsmt2d libs, because we have to add the namespaces back to the data before generating the roots,

Alright! Yeah, I knew there was a catch but I couldn't remember what it was. We could add this kind of processing to the rsmt2d lib though: celestiaorg/rsmt2d#12 (comment)

But yeah, this is also completely orthogonal to this PR. Thanks for the refactoring! Looks good so far.

We could definitely use the node collector in this package instead of DataSquarerowOrColumnRawInputParser, but I didn't for the time being in order not to export nmtNode from the plugin lib.

Couldn't we simply export the NodeCollector and keep the nmtNode private?

Good idea. Is this what you had in mind? 47b4125

Yes, that looks good!

liamsi · 2021-03-07T12:01:25Z

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go

+func prependNode(newNode node.Node, nodes []node.Node) []node.Node {
+	nodes = append(nodes, node.Node(nil))
+	copy(nodes[1:], nodes)
+	nodes[0] = newNode
+	return nodes


It is not the most pressing issue but I think @adlerjohn was worried about unnecessary allocations here (voiced in #152 or #155 - can't find the comment rn, there were so many). Now that this is a struct that has the nodes as a field, couldn't this be also a method of NmtNodeCollector and you could modify that field directly instead of returning the modified node slice here.

This method I believe only avoids allocations if the slice that's being prepended to never has to grow. It looks n.nodes is reserved with a size of extendedRowOrColumnSize, and should never exceed that, so there should be no allocations. That being said, as @liamsi said it might be a good idea to make this method more tightly linked to NmtNodeCollector to prevent it from being used without this guarantee.

The production code will now use a batch and immediately pass the node object the moment it is created to that batch instead of keeping track of the nodes in a slice (see NmtNodeAdder below). Not sure about the allocs in that batch object but we'd need to pass the nodes there anyway.
I'd be OK with making the NmtNodeCollector a private function again as previously and only expose the batch adder version of it.

I made NmtNodeCollector a private struct c99bc38, but I have kept prependNode the way it is for now until further discussion. The main reason being that we are now only using it for testing purposes, and the second being that I think we should default to the idiomatic approach and optimize later. Given that a slice is kinda a pointer under the hood, my gut is telling me that it (weirdly) might not save on allocations or speed. I'm happy to do a quick fix on this though should we decide it worth it.

The main reason being that we are now only using it for testing purposes, and the second being that I think we should default to the idiomatic approach and optimize later.

Absolutely agree 💯

In case we even go further and rework the entire IPLD representation of NMT nodes, this code will very likely disappear entirely.

P.S. As you can see I am not satisfied with the current solution, but that is ok for now :)

P.S. As you can see I am not satisfied with the current solution, but that is ok for now :)

Can you jot down what you dislike and what you would suggest in an issue? That would be helpful :-)

liamsi · 2021-03-09T12:57:58Z

types/consts.go

@@ -32,5 +33,5 @@ var (
 	ParitySharesNamespaceID = namespace.ID{0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF, 0xFF}

 	// change accordingly if another hash.Hash should be used as a base hasher in the NMT:
-	newBaseHashFunc = sha3.New256
+	newBaseHashFunc = sha256.New


docs/lazy-adr/adr-001-block-propagation.md

liamsi · 2021-03-09T19:52:06Z

types/block.go

+	format "github.com/ipfs/go-ipld-format"

+	"github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes"


From a dependencies perspective, it is probably desirable to not add any networking-related dependencies here to the types package. We can still merge this as is, but we should track this in an issue then.

Note that the main reason to make this thing a method of Block was that we could potentially cache the extended data square as a field and reuse it for putting the block data to ipfs. Maybe we can achieve the same without adding the actual networking logic here. Either way, we can figure this out later.

This a great point! You're right,PutBlock definitely does not have to be a method of Block. #196

codecov-io · 2021-03-10T04:08:34Z

Codecov Report

Merging #178 (8cbaa42) into master (eff282a) will increase coverage by 1.07%.
The diff coverage is 14.54%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #178      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.87%   61.95%   +1.07%     
==========================================
  Files         261      258       -3     
  Lines       23640    23069     -571     
==========================================
- Hits        14392    14292     -100     
+ Misses       7759     7291     -468     
+ Partials     1489     1486       -3

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cmd/tendermint/commands/init.go	`2.22% <0.00%> (-1.78%)`	⬇️
config/toml.go	`60.86% <ø> (ø)`
consensus/state.go	`68.30% <0.00%> (-0.11%)`	⬇️
node/node.go	`54.77% <ø> (-3.25%)`	⬇️
proxy/client.go	`0.00% <ø> (-23.08%)`	⬇️
test/e2e/generator/generate.go	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
types/block.go	`77.08% <ø> (-0.90%)`	⬇️
config/ipfs_config.go	`83.33% <83.33%> (ø)`
config/config.go	`77.88% <100.00%> (+0.21%)`	⬆️
... and 23 more

…d computing the erasure data twice handle error from posting block data use the dag instead of the pinningAdder object don't use the error wrapping directive

review feedback

add testing infrastructure for TestPutBlock

fix node collection and commit data to ipfs remove extra plugin var unexport node collector fix missed unexport

update test result, which changed because of the updated hash function update to the new PutBlock API

linter gods

…gister otherwise

Wondertan · 2021-03-10T13:31:52Z

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go

+func prependNode(newNode node.Node, nodes []node.Node) []node.Node {
+	nodes = append(nodes, node.Node(nil))
+	copy(nodes[1:], nodes)
+	nodes[0] = newNode
+	return nodes


In case we even go further and rework the entire IPLD representation of NMT nodes, this code will very likely disappear entirely.

P.S. As you can see I am not satisfied with the current solution, but that is ok for now :)

Wondertan · 2021-03-10T13:35:23Z

consensus/state.go

+	// TODO(evan): don't hard code context and timeout
+	if cs.IpfsAPI != nil {
+		// longer timeouts result in block proposers failing to propose blocks in time.
+		ctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), time.Millisecond*1500)


There is a special context.TODO() for such cases.

Also, what's the rationale behind having timeout here?

Nice, I didn't know that. In this case, we need the timeout because PutBlock is synchronous and will take too long, stopping the block proposer from proposing a block in time.

Wondertan · 2021-03-10T13:37:48Z

consensus/state.go

@@ -1100,6 +1103,19 @@ func (cs *State) defaultDecideProposal(height int64, round int32) {
 	} else if !cs.replayMode {
 		cs.Logger.Error("enterPropose: Error signing proposal", "height", height, "round", round, "err", err)
 	}
+
+	// post data to ipfs
+	// TODO(evan): don't hard code context and timeout


For this case, we can pass-through context already, having an issue for that seems like an overmanagement :)

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go

Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <[email protected]>

Wondertan

I think we need to add Nmt codec to cid.Codecs and cid.CodecsToStr maps in init func. We don't have that and only register MH codec. While this does not break anything for now, it may in the future.

evan-forbes · 2021-03-11T22:00:22Z

@Wondertan that makes sense. What string should be used in association with that codec? "nmt-inner-or-leaf-node"? @liamsi can I include this in this PR, or does it belong in another?

Wondertan · 2021-03-12T15:58:23Z

@evan-forbes, considering the fact that we have two nodes nmtNode and nmtLeafNode we should have two CID codecs - "nmt-leaf" and "nmt-inner" respectively. Also, I would rename nmtNode struct into nmtInnerNode not to introduce confusion.

liamsi · 2021-03-13T21:31:56Z

@liamsi can I include this in this PR, or does it belong in another?

It's certainly orthogonal to this PR but it's a small change and if it is a no-brainer, feel free to include it here.

That said, we were planning to submit a PR to go-cid to see if the maintainers would accept Nmt in cid.Codecs and that csv file instead - as soon as we have a running mvp. I'm not aware of any downsides of simply not including Nmt in that map in the plugin's code. Other plugins do not seem to follow that pattern of adding to the Codecs map locally. But I also do not see any downsides of simply including it in the map.
It's probably good practice to make sure we are not trying to use a codec that is already in use for some other plugin accidentally. Is that assumption right @Wondertan?

What string should be used in association with that codec?

The string should probably just be "nmt" or "nmt-node" as that codec is only used to register a block decoder.

@evan-forbes, considering the fact that we have two nodes nmtNode and nmtLeafNode we should have two CID codecs - "nmt-leaf" and "nmt-inner" respectively.

@Wondertan yeah, you brought that up in that first LL plugin PR. It's a good point! Feel free to open an issue about it so we have it in our backlog and if you really feel that it would add immediate value, feel free to start working on it (I certainly agree that it feels cleaner - simply not sure if it's worth the effort right now).
It's also orthogonal to this PR though. Otherwise, I was planning to revisit it after we have a running MVP anyway. Same with renaming the unexported node-types (also a good point though).

Wondertan · 2021-03-14T17:37:17Z

Is that assumption right @Wondertan?

Yes. Although, I come from the intention: "if you introduce any codec, pls be kind to register it in your app." :)

if it's worth the effort right now

I can agree here, but also I can agree that this is a no-brainer. I would compare this with the tech-debt or following good practices where one node type = one codec type. We can quickly resolve this in the PR without starting a separate discussion branch. I think adding a few lines(two string consts and map puts) does not worth that.

liamsi · 2021-03-14T18:05:39Z

@evan-forbes can you please add the Nmt to the cid.Codecs map?
@Wondertan Regarding "one node type = one codec type", do you mind opening a separate PR? I think it's a bit more involved than the first issue. And I'd like to keep this PR focused on writing block data into the merkle dag / ipld during consensus.

Wondertan · 2021-03-14T21:34:47Z

@liamsi, ok, will do

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go

Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <[email protected]>

liamsi · 2021-03-15T15:09:31Z

The data race that shows up in the CI seems unrelated to the changes in this PR. Here is the output though:

Click here to expand logs

--- FAIL: TestTransportHandshake (0.04s)
    transport_test.go:620: read tcp 127.0.0.1:42939->127.0.0.1:37038: i/o timeout
FAIL
coverage: 72.2% of statements
FAIL	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p	12.079s
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/conn	2.148s	coverage: 85.9% of statements
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/mock	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/mocks	[no test files]
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/pex	22.200s	coverage: 79.2% of statements
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/trust	0.092s	coverage: 87.1% of statements
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/upnp	[no test files]
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/privval	9.372s	coverage: 79.6% of statements
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/blockchain	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/consensus	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/crypto	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/libs/bits	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/mempool	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/p2p	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/privval	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/state	[no test files]
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/statesync	0.032s	coverage: 26.9% of statements
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/store	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/types	[no test files]
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proto/tendermint/version	[no test files]
ok  	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proxy	0.761s	coverage: 46.2% of statements
?   	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/proxy/mocks	[no test files]
Tendermint running!
==================
WARNING: DATA RACE
Write at 0x000004301f58 by goroutine 25:
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/core.SetEnvironment()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/core/env.go:37 +0x9a4
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/node.(*Node).ConfigureRPC()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/node/node.go:1049 +0x316
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/client/local.New()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/client/local/local.go:53 +0x44
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/client_test.getLocalClient()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/client/rpc_test.go:54 +0x5c
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/client_test.GetClients()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/client/rpc_test.go:61 +0xaf
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/client_test.TestBlockEvents()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/client/event_test.go:57 +0x36
  testing.tRunner()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/testing/testing.go:1123 +0x202

Previous read at 0x000004301f58 by goroutine 123:
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/core.UnsubscribeAll()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/core/events.go:106 +0x18e
  runtime.call32()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:540 +0x3d
  reflect.Value.Call()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/reflect/value.go:337 +0xd8
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.(*wsConnection).readRoutine()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/ws_handler.go:381 +0xaab

Goroutine 25 (running) created at:
  testing.(*T).Run()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/testing/testing.go:1168 +0x5bb
  testing.runTests.func1()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/testing/testing.go:1439 +0xa6
  testing.tRunner()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/testing/testing.go:1123 +0x202
  testing.runTests()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/ws_handler.go:226 +0xb9
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/libs/service.(*BaseService).Start()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/libs/service/service.go:140 +0x538
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.(*WebsocketManager).WebsocketHandler()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/ws_handler.go:91 +0x5c8
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.(*WebsocketManager).WebsocketHandler-fm()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/ws_handler.go:74 +0x64
  net/http.HandlerFunc.ServeHTTP()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:2042 +0x51
  net/http.(*ServeMux).ServeHTTP()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:2417 +0xaf
  github.com/rs/cors.(*Cors).Handler.func1()
      /home/runner/go/pkg/mod/github.com/rs/[email protected]/cors.go:219 +0x239
  net/http.HandlerFunc.ServeHTTP()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:2042 +0x51
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.maxBytesHandler.ServeHTTP()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/http_server.go:234 +0x187
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.(*maxBytesHandler).ServeHTTP()
      <autogenerated>:1 +0x9d
  github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server.RecoverAndLogHandler.func1()
      /home/runner/work/lazyledger-core/lazyledger-core/rpc/jsonrpc/server/http_server.go:207 +0x461
  net/http.HandlerFunc.ServeHTTP()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:2042 +0x51
  net/http.serverHandler.ServeHTTP()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:2843 +0xca
  net/http.(*conn).serve()
      /opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.15.8/x64/src/net/http/server.go:1925 +0x84c
==================
E[2021-03-15|13:39:57.891] Failed to write response                     module=rpc-server protocol=websocket remote=127.0.0.1:56756 err="write tcp 127.0.0.1:39049->127.0.0.1:56756: write: broken pipe" msg="RPCResponse{1 7B7D}"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:57.891] error while stopping connection              module=rpc-server protocol=websocket error="already stopped"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.095] Failed to write response                     module=rpc-server protocol=websocket remote=127.0.0.1:56758 err="websocket: close sent" msg="RPCResponse{1 7B7D}"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.095] error while stopping connection              module=rpc-server protocol=websocket error="already stopped"
--- FAIL: TestBlockEvents (0.40s)
    testing.go:1038: race detected during execution of test
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.428] Failed to write response                     module=rpc-server protocol=websocket remote=127.0.0.1:56764 err="websocket: close sent" msg="RPCResponse{1 7B7D}"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.429] error while stopping connection              module=rpc-server protocol=websocket error="already stopped"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.706] Failed to write response                     module=rpc-server protocol=websocket remote=127.0.0.1:56768 err="websocket: close sent" msg="RPCResponse{1 7B7D}"
E[2021-03-15|13:39:58.706] error while stopping connection              module=rpc-server protocol=websocket error="already stopped"
FAIL
coverage: 89.7% of statements
E[2021-03-15|13:40:11.599] Stopped accept routine, as transport is closed module=p2p numPeers=0
E[2021-03-15|13:40:11.599] Error serving server                         err="accept tcp 127.0.0.1:39049: use of closed network connection"
E[2021-03-15|13:40:11.599] Error starting gRPC server                   err="accept tcp 127.0.0.1:41473: use of closed network connection"
FAIL	github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/rpc/client	15.306s

I'll restart CI now.

evan-forbes · 2021-03-15T16:02:25Z

I was still trying to debug, and restarted the CI a few times with no luck... Looks like it passed this time! 😬

I'll open an issue regarding the nondeterministic test failures. #216

liamsi · 2021-03-15T19:47:01Z

types/block.go

+	// iterate through each set of col and row leaves
+	for _, leafSet := range leaves {
+		// create a batch per each leafSet
+		batchAdder := nodes.NewNmtNodeAdder(ctx, format.NewBatch(ctx, nodeAdder))


I think it is better to extract a local var from format.NewBatch(ctx, nodeAdder) and use that to commit to that batch.

liamsi · 2021-03-15T20:02:17Z

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go

+	// register the codecs in the global maps
+	cid.Codecs[NmtCodecName] = Nmt
+	cid.CodecToStr[Nmt] = NmtCodecName


Should we panic in case the codec already exists? (e.g. because another project registered 0x7700 for sth else)

liamsi

I left two nits. They can also be addressed in follow-up PRs instead.

Overall, this is amazing work 🚀 Thanks so much @evan-forbes!

evan-forbes changed the title ~~Use the IPFS core ojbect to post block data during proposal without computing the ExtendedDataSquare twice~~ Use the IPFS core ojbect to post block data during proposal Mar 4, 2021

evan-forbes self-assigned this Mar 4, 2021

evan-forbes mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2021

lazy-adr: Add Data Availability library #170

Merged

liamsi reviewed Mar 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

liamsi mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2021

Use rsmt2d lib with passed in NMT instead of repeating the logic in ll-core #172

Closed

liamsi reviewed Mar 7, 2021

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Mar 7, 2021

Make consensus messages DA ready #181

Closed

Store: only store header + DA header #182

Closed

This was referenced Mar 8, 2021

Store block Data using IPLD API #185

Closed

Change base hasher for the row/col roots to sha2 #187

Closed

liamsi reviewed Mar 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

docs/lazy-adr/adr-001-block-propagation.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

liamsi reviewed Mar 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

evan-forbes added 7 commits March 9, 2021 23:07

initial commit for posting data to ipfs using an ifps core object, an…

eb421c8

…d computing the erasure data twice handle error from posting block data use the dag instead of the pinningAdder object don't use the error wrapping directive

remove unused hash calc

09cfd50

use NodeAdder instead of the full IPFS API object

8bb43e9

review feedback

refactor flattening and adding the namespaces of extended data squares

7778e00

only post data to IPFS when an ipfs node is started

b5f6c85

refactor and export NodeCollector

50b2a03

export CidFromNamespacedSha256

f13043d

add testing infrastructure for TestPutBlock

evan-forbes force-pushed the evan/put-ipfs-api-object-compute-twice branch 2 times, most recently from 4d572a6 to 3b52870 Compare March 10, 2021 05:32

evan-forbes added 6 commits March 9, 2021 23:37

switch to using NmtNodeAdder instead of using the old NmtNodeCollector

c99bc38

fix node collection and commit data to ipfs remove extra plugin var unexport node collector fix missed unexport

change the default hash function to sha256 instead of sha3

4ad27a8

update test result, which changed because of the updated hash function update to the new PutBlock API

get out of dependency hell by adding an extra replace directive

e5c2e17

use a more minimal api

2534b07

linter gods

add an extra block decoder register, as some of the CI tests don't re…

e74ed4e

…gister otherwise

update default ifps config to reflect what the plugin uses

e9ca0b9

Wondertan reviewed Mar 10, 2021

View reviewed changes

musalbas changed the title ~~Use the IPFS core ojbect to post block data during proposal~~ Use the IPFS core object to post block data during proposal Mar 10, 2021

evan-forbes added 2 commits March 10, 2021 13:03

review feedback: add docs

d53622f

defer the cancel for the timeout

52fdd1b

evan-forbes mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2021

Write block data to IPFS asynchronously #204

Closed

evan-forbes and others added 2 commits March 10, 2021 14:07

review feedback: add go-verifcid replace directive comment

4464a08

fix comment position

c07235d

Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <[email protected]>

Wondertan reviewed Mar 11, 2021

View reviewed changes

evan-forbes added 2 commits March 14, 2021 20:13

register nmt codec to the global ipfs codec maps

3bf7bca

Merge branch 'master' into evan/put-ipfs-api-object-compute-twice

8cbaa42

liamsi reviewed Mar 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes/nodes.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

change NmtCodecName to "nmt-node"

c0f3d1c

Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <[email protected]>

evan-forbes mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2021

Fix nondeterministic test failures #216

Closed

liamsi reviewed Mar 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

liamsi approved these changes Mar 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

evan-forbes merged commit 5b848cb into master Mar 15, 2021

evan-forbes deleted the evan/put-ipfs-api-object-compute-twice branch March 15, 2021 20:43

liamsi mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2021

Explore if we want to store inner nodes (in memory) too celestiaorg/nmt#17

Open

This was referenced Apr 8, 2021

Implement RetrieveBlockData as described by ADR 002 #232

Merged

Test PutBlock with the max sized data square #275

Closed

		format "github.com/ipfs/go-ipld-format"

		"github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-core/p2p/ipld/plugin/nodes"

Use the IPFS core object to post block data during proposal #178

Use the IPFS core object to post block data during proposal #178

Conversation

evan-forbes commented Mar 4, 2021 • edited Loading

Description

liamsi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi Mar 4, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi Mar 5, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi Mar 4, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi Mar 7, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

adlerjohn Mar 9, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi Mar 9, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

evan-forbes Mar 10, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov-io commented Mar 10, 2021 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Wondertan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

evan-forbes commented Mar 11, 2021

Wondertan commented Mar 12, 2021

liamsi commented Mar 13, 2021 • edited Loading

Wondertan commented Mar 14, 2021 • edited Loading

liamsi commented Mar 14, 2021 • edited Loading

Wondertan commented Mar 14, 2021

liamsi commented Mar 15, 2021

evan-forbes commented Mar 15, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liamsi left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

evan-forbes commented Mar 4, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi Mar 4, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi Mar 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi Mar 4, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi Mar 7, 2021 •

edited

Loading

adlerjohn Mar 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi Mar 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

evan-forbes Mar 10, 2021 •

edited

Loading

codecov-io commented Mar 10, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi commented Mar 13, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Wondertan commented Mar 14, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi commented Mar 14, 2021 •

edited

Loading

liamsi left a comment •

edited

Loading