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

overlay survey should look and act more deterministic #2592

Closed
MonsieurNicolas opened this issue Jun 23, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #4275
Closed

overlay survey should look and act more deterministic #2592

MonsieurNicolas opened this issue Jun 23, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #4275
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@MonsieurNicolas
Copy link
Contributor

Right now when running a survey, even with a small timeout (like -d 30) the script can run for potentially a long time.

We should log some stats to show that it's doing something (like backlog size, number of peers and connections discovered).

Also, the criteria for stopping the script is odd: it uses core's internal survey state to decide on this.

In particular, this seems quite arbitrary as the script may retry many times to survey certain nodes.

I think it would make more sense to have the script actually decide on its timeout based on its own backlog, and use core's internal timeout more as a mechanism to make sure that even if the script crashes, core stops surveying.

bboston7 added a commit to bboston7/stellar-core that referenced this issue Jan 31, 2024
This change adds a `simulate` command to the network survey script that
takes a network topology in graphml format (such as the one produced by
the `survey` command) and simulates a survey of said network.  It is
intended as a tool to use during development of the script itself to
test the script without running a survey on the network, and should
make it easier to address issues such as stellar#2592.

This is an initial version of the `simulate` command that will evolve as
we need to test the script under additional scenarios.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants