Add Benchmark Sequencer System Test#4341
Open
KolbyML wants to merge 9 commits into
Open
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4341 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 32.79% 32.70% -0.10%
==========================================
Files 494 496 +2
Lines 58611 58675 +64
==========================================
- Hits 19223 19190 -33
- Misses 36026 36110 +84
- Partials 3362 3375 +13 |
Contributor
❌ 6 Tests Failed:
View the top 3 failed tests by shortest run time
📣 Thoughts on this report? Let Codecov know! | Powered by Codecov |
KolbyML
changed the title
gligneul
reviewed
Feb 6, 2026
Member
Author
|
I am just going to mark this as draft, and let the other PR merge first |
Member
|
let me assign this PR back to you; once ready for review, please reassign me |
Member
Author
|
@pmikolajczyk41 @gligneul ready for another look 🫡 |
pmikolajczyk41
left a comment
pmikolajczyk41
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nothing really blocking, just a bunch of comments and questions; generally LGTM
Comment on lines
+4
to
+5
| // DANGER! this file is included in all builds | ||
| // DANGER! do not place any experimental tag logic here |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do you find these warnings helpful? I guess that nitro just won't compile, if one adds the experimental tag here
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe the comment means not to add experimental logic here because it is included in all builds.
|
|
||
| func (c *BenchmarkingSequencerConfig) Validate() error { | ||
| if c.Enable { | ||
| log.Warn("benchmarking sequencer requested but not supported in this build (missing experimental build tag)") |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd consider returning an error here in case someone explicitly requests benchmarking, but doesn't add the tag
| "--http.port", "8547", | ||
| "--http.addr", "127.0.0.1", | ||
| "--http.api=net,web3,eth,arb,arbdebug,debug", | ||
| "--http.api=net,web3,eth,arb,arbdebug,debug,benchseq", |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thinking out loud - in Rust, I'd definitely recommend:
#[cfg(feature = "experimental")]
"--http.api=net,web3,eth,arb,arbdebug,debug,benchseq",
#[cfg(not(feature = "experimental"))]
"--http.api=net,web3,eth,arb,arbdebug,debug",
but in Go, I'm wondering if we should somehow tag-gate this api, so that user's won't see unsupported api in the list
Comment on lines
+229
to
+232
| if err := c.BenchmarkingSequencer.Validate(); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| return nil |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe for now:
Suggested change
| if err := c.BenchmarkingSequencer.Validate(); err != nil { | |
| return err | |
| } | |
| return nil | |
| return c.BenchmarkingSequencer.Validate() |
| return nil, err | ||
| } | ||
| txPublisher = sequencer | ||
| if config.Dangerous.BenchmarkingSequencer.Enable { |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we don't need this condition, do we?
| Fatal(t, "benchseq_txRetryQueueLength failed with unexpected error:", err) | ||
| } | ||
| var blockCreated bool | ||
| // create block with all of the transactions (they should fit) |
Comment on lines
+52
to
+69
| // check that blocks are created automatically | ||
| startBlock, err := builder.L2.Client.BlockNumber(ctx) | ||
| Require(t, err) | ||
| tx := builder.L2Info.PrepareTx("Owner", "Owner", builder.L2Info.TransferGas, big.NewInt(1), nil) | ||
| builder.L2.SendWaitTestTransactions(t, types.Transactions{tx}) | ||
| timeout := time.After(5 * time.Second) | ||
| for { | ||
| block, err := builder.L2.Client.BlockNumber(ctx) | ||
| Require(t, err) | ||
| if block > startBlock { | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| select { | ||
| case <-timeout: | ||
| Fatal(t, "timeout exceeded while waiting for new block") | ||
| case <-time.After(20 * time.Millisecond): | ||
| } | ||
| } |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you can consider checkBatchPosting utility instead
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (s *BenchmarkingSequencer) Start(ctx context.Context) error { | ||
| // override Sequencer.Start to not start the inner sequencer |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if we don't start the inner sequencer, how can createBlock succeed? shouldn't we run the logic from sequencer.go:Start() at some point?
| return fmt.Errorf("error validating ConsensusRPCClient config: %w", err) | ||
| } | ||
| if err := c.Dangerous.Validate(); err != nil { | ||
| return err |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just for consistency, you can add context for the error, as the checks above do
| } | ||
| // check that tx queue is empty | ||
| var txQueueLen int | ||
| err = rpcClient.CallContext(ctx, &txQueueLen, "benchseq_txQueueLength", false) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does it make sense to test benchseq_txRetryQueueLength as well? I think we don't call this endpoint at all
Member
|
oh, and you probably miss a companion geth PR (or at least a link in the description) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes NIT-4481 this code was originally apart of NIT-3912