This changed the node pruning logic and moved test/functional/feature_blockfilterindex_prune.py
to test/functional/feature_index_prune.py.
Please verify that:
1. I migrated the test correctly
2. The magic numbers in the test look fine
With respect to #2: I believe the magic numbers are wrong. I previously had to tweak them heavily
in commit 1278b31. I don't think I did it correctly then, and so I don't believe them to be correct now.
To summarize what this tweaking was: I changed the magic numbers in the test to work properly,
but I suspect that in changing them, I may have nullified what the test was testing.
It's very possible that the reason the test was failing was because of an underlying bug with the pruning
in elements which we have to fix, rather than just being an issue with the test itself.
error is a low-level function with a sole dependency on LogPrintf, which
is defined in logging.h
The background of this commit is an ongoing effort to decouple the
libbitcoinkernel library from the ArgsManager defined in system.h.
Moving the function out of system.h allows including it from a separate
source file without including the ArgsManager definitions from system.h.
3141eab9c6 test: add functional test for ScanAndUnlinkAlreadyPrunedFiles (Andrew Toth)
e252909e56 test: add unit test for ScanAndUnlinkAlreadyPrunedFiles (Andrew Toth)
77557dda4a prune: scan and unlink already pruned block files on startup (Andrew Toth)
Pull request description:
There are a few cases where we can mark a block and undo file as pruned in our block index, but not actually remove the files from disk.
1. If we call `FindFilesToPrune` or `FindFilesToPruneManual` and crash before `UnlinkPrunedFiles`.
2. If on Windows there is an open file handle to the file somewhere else when calling `fs::remove` in `UnlinkPrunedFiles` (https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/filesystem/remove, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/fileapi/nf-fileapi-deletefilew#remarks). This could be from another process, or if we are calling `ReadBlockFromDisk`/`ReadRawBlockFromDisk` without having a lock on `cs_main` (which has been allowed since ccd8ef65f9).
This PR mitigates this by scanning all pruned block files on startup after `LoadBlockIndexDB` and unlinking them again.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 3141eab9c6
pablomartin4btc:
re-ACK with added functional test 3141eab9c6.
furszy:
Code review ACK 3141eab9
theStack:
Code-review ACK 3141eab9c6
Tree-SHA512: 6c73bc57838ad1b7e5d441af3c4d6bf4c61c4382e2b86485e57fbb74a61240710c0ceeceb8b4834e610ecfa3175c6955c81ea4b2285fee11ca6383f472979d8d
bf95976061 doc: add note about snapshot chainstate init (James O'Beirne)
e4d7995286 test: add testcases for snapshot initialization (James O'Beirne)
cced4e7336 test: move-only-ish: factor out LoadVerifyActivateChainstate() (James O'Beirne)
51fc9241c0 test: allow on-disk coins and block tree dbs in tests (James O'Beirne)
3c361391b8 test: add reset_chainstate parameter for snapshot unittests (James O'Beirne)
00b357c215 validation: add ResetChainstates() (James O'Beirne)
3a29dfbfb2 move-only: test: make snapshot chainstate setup reusable (James O'Beirne)
8153bd9247 blockmanager: avoid undefined behavior during FlushBlockFile (James O'Beirne)
ad67ff377c validation: remove snapshot datadirs upon validation failure (James O'Beirne)
34d1590331 add utilities for deleting on-disk leveldb data (James O'Beirne)
252abd1e8b init: add utxo snapshot detection (James O'Beirne)
f9f1735f13 validation: rename snapshot chainstate dir (James O'Beirne)
d14bebf100 db: add StoragePath to CDBWrapper/CCoinsViewDB (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
This is part of the [assumeutxo project](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/11) (parent PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15606)
---
Half of the replacement for #24232. The original PR grew larger than expected throughout the review process.
This change adds the ability to initialize a snapshot-based chainstate during init if one is detected on disk. This is of course unused as of now (aside from in unittests) given that we haven't yet enabled actually loading snapshots.
Don't be scared! There are some big move-only commits in here.
Accompanying changes include:
- moving the snapshot coinsdb directory from being called `chainstate_[base blockhash]` to `chainstate_snapshot`, since we only support one snapshot in use at a time. This simplifies some logic, but it necessitates writing that base blockhash out to a file within the coinsdb dir. See [discussion here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24232#discussion_r832762880).
- adding a simple fix in `FlushBlockFile()` that avoids a crash when attemping to flush to disk before `LoadBlockIndexDB()` is called, which happens when calling `MaybeRebalanceCaches()` during multiple chainstate init.
- improving the unittest to allow testing with on-disk chainstates - necessary to test a simulated restart and re-initialization.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
utACK bf95976061
ariard:
Code Review ACK bf9597606
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK bf95976061. Changes since last review: rebasing, switching from CAutoFile to AutoFile, adding comments, switching from BOOST_CHECK to Assert in test util, using chainman.GetMutex() in tests, destroying one ChainstateManager before creating a new one in tests
fjahr:
utACK bf95976061
aureleoules:
ACK bf95976061
Tree-SHA512: 15ae75caf19f8d12a12d2647c52897904d27b265a7af6b4ae7b858592eeadb8f9da6c2394b6baebec90adc28742c053e3eb506119577dae7c1e722ebb3b7bcc0
bcb0cacac2 reindex, log, test: fixes#21379 (mruddy)
Pull request description:
Fixes#21379.
The blocks/blk?????.dat files are mutated and become increasingly malformed, or corrupt, as a result of running the re-indexing process.
The mutations occur after the re-indexing process has finished, as new blocks are appended, but are a result of a re-indexing process miscalculation that lingers in the block manager's `m_blockfile_info` `nSize` data until node restart.
These additions to the blk files are non-fatal, but also not desirable.
That is, this is a form of data corruption that the reading code is lenient enough to process (it skips the extra bytes), but it adds some scary looking log messages as it encounters them.
The summary of the problem is that the re-index process double counts the size of the serialization header (magic message start bytes [4 bytes] + length [4 bytes] = 8 bytes) while calculating the blk data file size (both values already account for the serialization header's size, hence why it is over accounted).
This bug manifests itself in a few different ways, after re-indexing, when a new block from a peer is processed:
1. If the new block will not fit into the last blk file processed while re-indexing, while remaining under the 128MiB limit, then the blk file is flushed to disk and truncated to a size that is 8 greater than it should be. The truncation adds zero bytes (see `FlatFileSeq::Flush` and `TruncateFile`).
1. If the last blk file processed while re-indexing has logical space for the new block under the 128 MiB limit:
1. If the blk file was not already large enough to hold the new block, then the zeros are, in effect, added by `fseek` when the file is opened for writing. Eight zero bytes are added to the end of the last blk file just before the new block is written. This happens because the write offset is 8 too great due to the miscalculation. The result is 8 zero bytes between the end of the last block and the beginning of the next block's magic + length + block.
1. If the blk file was already large enough to hold the new block, then the current existing file contents remain in the 8 byte gap between the end of the last block and the beginning of the next block's magic + length + block. Commonly, when this occcurs, it is due to the blk file containing blocks that are not connected to the block tree during reindex and are thus left behind by the reindex process and later overwritten when new blocks are added. The orphaned blocks can be valid blocks, but due to the nature of concurrent block download, the parent may not have been retrieved and written by the time the node was previously shutdown.
ACKs for top commit:
LarryRuane:
tested code-review ACK bcb0cacac2
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK bcb0cacac2. This is a disturbing bug with an easy fix which seems well-worth merging.
mzumsande:
ACK bcb0cacac2 (reviewed code and did some testing, I agree that it fixes the bug).
w0xlt:
tACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24858/commits/bcb0cacac28e98a39dc856c574a0872fe17059e9
Tree-SHA512: acc97927ea712916506772550451136b0f1e5404e92df24cc05e405bb09eb6fe7c3011af3dd34a7723c3db17fda657ae85fa314387e43833791e9169c0febe51
If we call FlushBlockFile() without having intitialized the block index
with LoadBlockIndexDB(), we may be indexing into an empty vector.
Specifically this is an issue when we call MaybeRebalanceCaches() during
chainstate init before the block index has been loaded, which calls
FlushBlockFile().
Also add an assert to avoid undefined behavior.
Co-authored-by: Russell Yanofsky <russ@yanofsky.org>
