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

Expose txPriority parameter for customized transaction selection #3546

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

moreal
Copy link
Contributor

@moreal moreal commented Dec 11, 2023

  • Added txPriority as an argument in the public constructor API.
  • This allows external callers to specify the priority for including transactions in the block to propose.

(DX Team Jira issue card PDX-231)

@moreal moreal self-assigned this Dec 11, 2023
@moreal moreal marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2023 23:20
@moreal moreal added the api Related to user-facing APIs label Dec 11, 2023
OnedgeLee
OnedgeLee previously approved these changes Dec 12, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@OnedgeLee OnedgeLee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

To use txPriority parameter on the app, parameter have to be injected also on the ConsensusReactor, and have to be optioned by ConsensusReactorOptions, approved since changes are proper though.

OnedgeLee
OnedgeLee previously approved these changes Dec 12, 2023
@greymistcube
Copy link
Contributor

It'll take some time before 4.0 gets released to mainnet. Perhaps we should merge this into 3.9-maintenance?

- Added `txPriority` as an argument in the public constructor API.
- This allows external callers to specify the priority for including
  transactions in the block to propose.

This PR has 48 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +39 -9
Percentile : 19.2%

Total files changed: 6

Change summary by file extension:
.md : +7 -0
.cs : +32 -9

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@moreal
Copy link
Contributor Author

moreal commented Dec 12, 2023

It'll take some time before 4.0 gets released to mainnet. Perhaps we should merge this into 3.9-maintenance?

It's not a PR that needs to be rushed, but I don't want to be stuck for a month or more due to workflow. Since this isn't a hotfix, can I change the PR target branch to the 3.x-candidate branch?

@greymistcube
Copy link
Contributor

It's not a PR that needs to be rushed, but I don't want to be stuck for a month or more due to workflow. Since this isn't a hotfix, can I change the PR target branch to the 3.x-candidate branch?

I think it'll be fine. We aren't strictly adhering to semantic versioning scheme anyway. 🙄

@moreal
Copy link
Contributor Author

moreal commented Dec 12, 2023

I realized BlockChain.ListStagedTransactions(txPriority) re-orders even if they're ordered with txPriority.

IEnumerable<Transaction> unorderedTxs = StagePolicy.Iterate(this);
if (txPriority is { } comparer)
{
unorderedTxs = unorderedTxs.OrderBy(tx => tx, comparer);
}
Transaction[] txs = unorderedTxs.ToArray();
Dictionary<Address, LinkedList<Transaction>> seats = txs
.GroupBy(tx => tx.Signer)
.Select(g => (g.Key, new LinkedList<Transaction>(g.OrderBy(tx => tx.Nonce))))
.ToDictionary(pair => pair.Item1, pair => pair.Item2);
return txs.Select(tx =>
{
LinkedList<Transaction> seat = seats[tx.Signer];
Transaction first = seat.First.Value;
seat.RemoveFirst();
return first;
}).ToImmutableList();
}

This pull request may be stuck until I find a way to resolve this issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api Related to user-facing APIs Extra Small
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants