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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Don't use honest_makers in case: mempool conflict #572

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 11, 2020
Merged

Don't use honest_makers in case: mempool conflict #572

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
77 changes: 43 additions & 34 deletions jmclient/jmclient/taker_utils.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -250,46 +250,55 @@ def tumbler_taker_finished_update(taker, schedulefile, tumble_log, options,
tumble_log.info(waiting_message)
log.info(waiting_message)
else:
#a transaction failed, either because insufficient makers
#(acording to minimum_makers) responded in Phase 1, or not all
#makers responded in Phase 2. We'll first try to repeat without the
#troublemakers.
# a transaction failed, either because insufficient makers
# (acording to minimum_makers) responded in Phase 1, or not all
# makers responded in Phase 2, or the tx was a mempool conflict.
# If the tx was a mempool conflict, we should restart with random
# maker choice as usual. If someone didn't respond, we'll try to
# repeat without the troublemakers.
log.info("Schedule entry: " + str(
taker.schedule[taker.schedule_index]) + \
" failed after timeout, trying again")
taker.add_ignored_makers(taker.nonrespondants)
#Is the failure in Phase 2?
if not taker.latest_tx is None:
#Now we have to set the specific group we want to use, and hopefully
#they will respond again as they showed honesty last time.
#Note that we must wipe the list first; other honest makers needn't
#have the right settings (e.g. max cjamount), so can't be carried
#over from earlier transactions.
taker.honest_makers = []
taker.add_honest_makers(list(set(
taker.maker_utxo_data.keys()).symmetric_difference(
set(taker.nonrespondants))))
#If insufficient makers were honest, we can only tweak the schedule.
#If enough were, we prefer the restart with them only:
log.info("Inside a Phase 2 failure; number of honest respondants was: " + str(len(taker.honest_makers)))
log.info("They were: " + str(taker.honest_makers))
if len(taker.honest_makers) >= jm_single().config.getint(
"POLICY", "minimum_makers"):
tumble_log.info("Transaction attempt failed, attempting to "
"restart with subset.")
tumble_log.info("The paramaters of the failed attempt: ")
tumble_log.info(str(taker.schedule[taker.schedule_index]))
#we must reset the number of counterparties, as well as fix who they
#are; this is because the number is used to e.g. calculate fees.
#cleanest way is to reset the number in the schedule before restart.
taker.schedule[taker.schedule_index][2] = len(taker.honest_makers)
retry_str = "Retrying with: " + str(taker.schedule[
taker.schedule_index][2]) + " counterparties."
tumble_log.info(retry_str)
log.info(retry_str)
taker.set_honest_only(True)
taker.schedule_index -= 1
return
if len(taker.nonrespondants) == 0:
# transaction was created validly but conflicted in the
# mempool; just try again without honest settings;
# i.e. fallback to same as Phase 1 failure.
log.info("Invalid transaction; possible mempool conflict.")
else:
#Now we have to set the specific group we want to use, and hopefully
#they will respond again as they showed honesty last time.
#Note that we must wipe the list first; other honest makers needn't
#have the right settings (e.g. max cjamount), so can't be carried
#over from earlier transactions.
taker.honest_makers = []
taker.add_honest_makers(list(set(
taker.maker_utxo_data.keys()).symmetric_difference(
set(taker.nonrespondants))))
#If insufficient makers were honest, we can only tweak the schedule.
#If enough were, we prefer to restart with them only:
log.info("Inside a Phase 2 failure; number of honest "
"respondants was: " + str(len(taker.honest_makers)))
log.info("They were: " + str(taker.honest_makers))
if len(taker.honest_makers) >= jm_single().config.getint(
"POLICY", "minimum_makers"):
tumble_log.info("Transaction attempt failed, attempting to "
"restart with subset.")
tumble_log.info("The paramaters of the failed attempt: ")
tumble_log.info(str(taker.schedule[taker.schedule_index]))
#we must reset the number of counterparties, as well as fix who they
#are; this is because the number is used to e.g. calculate fees.
#cleanest way is to reset the number in the schedule before restart.
taker.schedule[taker.schedule_index][2] = len(taker.honest_makers)
retry_str = "Retrying with: " + str(taker.schedule[
taker.schedule_index][2]) + " counterparties."
tumble_log.info(retry_str)
log.info(retry_str)
taker.set_honest_only(True)
taker.schedule_index -= 1
return

#There were not enough honest counterparties.
#Tumbler is aggressive in trying to complete; we tweak the schedule
Expand Down