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.

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

Beat itest [2/3]: document and fix itest flakes #9307

Open
wants to merge 20 commits into
base: yy-beat-itest-shuffle
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yyforyongyu
Copy link
Member

Check #9306 for context, and #9260 for the final result.

Changes in each commit is pretty small, major changes are,

  • flatten some tests so it's easier to debug.

  • We encountered issue [bug]: listunspent shows spent outputs #8786 - which should have been caught way easier if we didn't use the standby nodes, and is now temporarily hacked. This will be my high-priority item to fix.

  • when checking for the sweeping tx, if the tx is RBFed, the old txid won't work.

  • connect to an already connected node can result in an error.

  • increase payment timeout for sql.

  • assert channel is in the grapb before sending payments.

  • assert outgoing and incoming HTLCs separately.

  • increase rpcmaxwebsockets for btcd.

  • document the MPP flake - we now have a much better understanding of how it happened.

  • some other minor refactors.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 26, 2024

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)
  • llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Experiment)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

Pull reviewers stats

Stats of the last 30 days for lnd:

User Total reviews Time to review Total comments
guggero
🥇
29
▀▀▀▀
13h 1m
31
▀▀
yyforyongyu
🥈
11
1d 1h 32m
28
▀▀
ellemouton
🥉
11
16h 30m
21
ziggie1984
8
12h 47m
9
Roasbeef
7
4d 13h 56m
▀▀
47
▀▀▀
ProofOfKeags
3
5d 4h 23m
▀▀
10
Abdulkbk
3
13h 37m
2
ViktorTigerstrom
2
2d 14h 26m
5
alexbosworth
1
4d 11h 58m
▀▀
1
bhandras
1
12h
0
bitromortac
1
16h 16m
0

Copy link
Collaborator

@guggero guggero left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Amazing bug fixes, thank you so much! Crazy how many flakes you were to investigate and fix! You're my absolute hero 💯

itest/lnd_estimate_route_fee_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-shuffle branch from c6819c0 to 3c60868 Compare December 3, 2024 22:08
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-flakes branch 2 times, most recently from a558fe3 to 3ac3b53 Compare December 3, 2024 22:13
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-shuffle branch from 3c60868 to abda3ce Compare December 4, 2024 06:36
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-shuffle branch from abda3ce to 21082c5 Compare December 5, 2024 05:15
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-shuffle branch from 21082c5 to 9374711 Compare December 5, 2024 15:09
@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu force-pushed the yy-beat-itest-shuffle branch from 9374711 to e7beb0a Compare December 10, 2024 07:18
So it's easier to get the logs and debug.
We previously didn't see this issue because we always have nodes being
over-funded.
So we know which open channel operation failed.
We need to mine an empty block as the tx may already have entered the
mempool. This should be fixed once we start using the sweeper to handle
the justice tx.
The reconnection will happen automatically when the nodes have a
channel, so we just ensure the connection instead of reconnecting
directly.
So we won't forget to assert the topology after opening a chain of
channels.
This is no longer needed since we don't have standby nodes, plus it's
causing panic in windows build due to `edge.Policy` being nil.
This has been seen in the itest which can lead to the node startup
failure,
```
2024-11-20 18:55:15.727 [INF] RPCS: Max websocket clients exceeded [25] - disconnecting client 127.0.0.1:57224
```
This is needed so we can have one place to fix the flakes found in the
MPP-related tests, which is fixed in the following commit.
We now make sure the channel participants have heard their private
channel when opening channels.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants