machi/src/machi_chain_manager1.erl

2136 lines
94 KiB
Erlang
Raw Normal View History

%% -------------------------------------------------------------------
%%
%% Machi: a small village of replicated files
%%
%% Copyright (c) 2014-2015 Basho Technologies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
%%
%% This file is provided to you under the Apache License,
%% Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file
%% except in compliance with the License. You may obtain
%% a copy of the License at
%%
%% http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
%%
%% Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
%% software distributed under the License is distributed on an
%% "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
%% KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
%% specific language governing permissions and limitations
%% under the License.
%%
%% -------------------------------------------------------------------
%% @doc The Machi chain manager, Guardian of all things related to
%% Chain Replication state, status, and data replica safety.
%%
%% The Chain Manager is responsible for managing the state of Machi's
%% "Chain Replication" state. This role is roughly analogous to the
%% "Riak Core" application inside of Riak, which takes care of
%% coordinating replica placement and replica repair.
%%
%% For each primitive data server in the cluster, a Machi FLU, there
%% is a Chain Manager process that manages its FLU's role within the
%% Machi cluster's Chain Replication scheme. Each Chain Manager
%% process executes locally and independently to manage the
%% distributed state of a single Machi Chain Replication chain.
%%
%% Machi's Chain Manager process performs similar tasks as Riak Core's
%% claimant. However, Machi has several active Chain Manager
%% processes, one per FLU server, instead of a single active process
%% like Core's claimant. Each Chain Manager process acts
%% independently; each is constrained so that it will reach consensus
%% via independent computation & action.
-module(machi_chain_manager1).
%% TODO: I am going to sever the connection between the flowchart and the
%% code. That diagram is really valuable, but it also takes a long time
%% to make any kind of edit; the process is too slow. This is a todo
%% item a reminder that the flowchart is important documentation and
%% must be brought back into sync with the code soon.
-behaviour(gen_server).
-include("machi_projection.hrl").
-include("machi_chain_manager.hrl").
-record(ch_mgr, {
name :: pv1_server(),
flap_limit :: non_neg_integer(),
proj :: projection(),
%%
timer :: 'undefined' | timer:tref(),
ignore_timer :: boolean(),
proj_history :: queue:queue(),
flaps=0 :: integer(),
flap_start = ?NOT_FLAPPING
:: erlang:timestamp(),
repair_worker :: 'undefined' | pid(),
repair_start :: 'undefined' | erlang:timestamp(),
repair_final_status :: 'undefined' | term(),
runenv :: list(), %proplist()
opts :: list(), %proplist()
members_dict :: p_srvr_dict(),
proxies_dict :: orddict:orddict()
}).
-define(D(X), io:format(user, "~s ~p\n", [??X, X])).
-define(Dw(X), io:format(user, "~s ~w\n", [??X, X])).
-define(FLU_PC, machi_proxy_flu1_client).
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
-define(TO, (2*1000)). % default timeout
%% Keep a history of our flowchart execution in the process dictionary.
-define(REACT(T), put(react, [T|get(react)])).
%% Define the period of private projection stability before we'll
%% start repair.
-ifdef(TEST).
-define(REPAIR_START_STABILITY_TIME, 3).
-else. % TEST
-define(REPAIR_START_STABILITY_TIME, 10).
-endif. % TEST
-define(RETURN2(X), begin (catch put(why2, [?LINE|get(why2)])), X end).
%% API
-export([start_link/2, start_link/3, stop/1, ping/1,
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
set_chain_members/2, set_active/2]).
-export([init/1, handle_call/3, handle_cast/2, handle_info/2,
terminate/2, code_change/3]).
-export([make_chmgr_regname/1, projection_transitions_are_sane/2,
inner_projection_exists/1, inner_projection_or_self/1,
simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane/3,
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane/5,
chain_state_transition_is_sane/5]).
%% Exports so that EDoc docs generated for these internal funcs.
-export([mk/3]).
-ifdef(TEST).
-export([test_calc_projection/2,
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
test_write_public_projection/2,
test_read_latest_public_projection/2,
test_react_to_env/1,
get_all_hosed/1]).
-ifdef(EQC).
-include_lib("eqc/include/eqc.hrl").
-endif.
-ifdef(PULSE).
-compile({parse_transform, pulse_instrument}).
-endif.
-include_lib("eunit/include/eunit.hrl").
-compile(export_all).
-endif. %TEST
start_link(MyName, MembersDict) ->
start_link(MyName, MembersDict, []).
start_link(MyName, MembersDict, MgrOpts) ->
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
gen_server:start_link({local, make_chmgr_regname(MyName)}, ?MODULE,
{MyName, MembersDict, MgrOpts}, []).
stop(Pid) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {stop}, infinity).
ping(Pid) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {ping}, infinity).
%% @doc Set chain members list.
%%
%% NOTE: This implementation is a bit brittle, in that an author with
%% higher rank may try to re-suggest the old membership list if it
%% races with an author of lower rank. For now, we suggest calling
%% set_chain_members() first on the author of highest rank and finish
%% with lowest rank, i.e. name z* first, name a* last.
set_chain_members(Pid, MembersDict) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {set_chain_members, MembersDict}, infinity).
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
set_active(Pid, Boolean) when Boolean == true; Boolean == false ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {set_active, Boolean}, infinity).
-ifdef(TEST).
%% Test/debugging code only.
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
test_write_public_projection(Pid, Proj) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {test_write_public_projection, Proj}, infinity).
%% Calculate a projection and return it to us.
%% If KeepRunenvP is true, the server will retain its change in its
%% runtime environment, e.g., changes in simulated network partitions.
test_calc_projection(Pid, KeepRunenvP) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {test_calc_projection, KeepRunenvP}, infinity).
test_read_latest_public_projection(Pid, ReadRepairP) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {test_read_latest_public_projection, ReadRepairP},
infinity).
test_react_to_env(Pid) ->
gen_server:call(Pid, {test_react_to_env}, infinity).
-endif. % TEST
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
%% Bootstrapping is a hassle ... when when isn't it?
%%
%% If InitMembersDict == [], then we don't know anything about the chain
%% that we'll be participating in. We'll have to wait for directions from
%% our sysadmin later.
%%
%% If InitMembersDict /= [], then we do know what chain we're
%% participating in. It's probably test code, since that's about the
%% only time that we know so much at init() time.
%%
%% In either case, we'll try to create & store an epoch 0 projection
%% and store it to both projections stores. This is tricky if
%% InitMembersDict == [] because InitMembersDict usually contains the
%% #p_svrv records that we need to *write* to the projection store,
%% even our own private store! For test code, we get the store
%% manager's pid in MgrOpts and use direct gen_server calls to the
%% local projection store.
init({MyName, InitMembersDict, MgrOpts}) ->
random:seed(now()),
init_remember_partition_hack(),
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
ZeroAll_list = [P#p_srvr.name || {_,P} <- orddict:to_list(InitMembersDict)],
ZeroProj = make_none_projection(MyName, ZeroAll_list, InitMembersDict),
ok = store_zeroth_projection_maybe(ZeroProj, MgrOpts),
{MembersDict, Proj} =
get_my_private_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, InitMembersDict, ZeroProj),
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
All_list = [P#p_srvr.name || {_, P} <- orddict:to_list(MembersDict)],
Opt = fun(Key, Default) -> proplists:get_value(Key, MgrOpts, Default) end,
RunEnv = [{seed, Opt(seed, now())},
{use_partition_simulator, Opt(use_partition_simulator, false)},
{network_partitions, Opt(network_partitions, [])},
{network_islands, Opt(network_islands, [])},
{up_nodes, Opt(up_nodes, not_init_yet)}],
ActiveP = Opt(active_mode, true),
S = #ch_mgr{name=MyName,
proj=Proj,
%% TODO 2015-03-04: revisit, should this constant be bigger?
%% Yes, this should be bigger, but it's a hack. There is
%% no guarantee that all parties will advance to a minimum
%% flap awareness in the amount of time that this mgr will.
flap_limit=length(All_list) + 50,
timer='undefined',
proj_history=queue:new(),
runenv=RunEnv,
opts=MgrOpts},
{_, S2} = do_set_chain_members_dict(MembersDict, S),
S3 = if ActiveP == false ->
S2;
ActiveP == true ->
set_active_timer(S2)
end,
{ok, S3}.
handle_call({ping}, _From, S) ->
{reply, pong, S};
handle_call({set_chain_members, MembersDict}, _From,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName,
proj=#projection_v1{all_members=OldAll_list,
epoch_number=OldEpoch,
upi=OldUPI}=OldProj}=S) ->
{Reply, S2} = do_set_chain_members_dict(MembersDict, S),
%% TODO: should there be any additional sanity checks? Right now,
%% if someone does something bad, then do_react_to_env() will
%% crash, which will crash us, and we'll restart in a sane & old
%% config.
All_list = [P#p_srvr.name || {_, P} <- orddict:to_list(MembersDict)],
MissingInNew = OldAll_list -- All_list,
NewUPI = OldUPI -- MissingInNew,
NewDown = All_list -- NewUPI,
NewEpoch = OldEpoch + 1111,
NewProj = machi_projection:update_checksum(
OldProj#projection_v1{author_server=MyName,
creation_time=now(),
epoch_number=NewEpoch,
all_members=All_list,
upi=NewUPI,
repairing=[],
down=NewDown,
members_dict=MembersDict}),
%% Reset all flapping state.
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
NewProj2 = NewProj#projection_v1{flap=make_flapping_i()},
S3 = S2#ch_mgr{proj=NewProj2,
proj_history=queue:new()},
{_QQ, S4} = do_react_to_env(S3),
{reply, Reply, S4};
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
handle_call({set_active, Boolean}, _From, #ch_mgr{timer=TRef}=S) ->
case {Boolean, TRef} of
{true, undefined} ->
S2 = set_active_timer(S),
{reply, ok, S2};
{false, _} ->
(catch timer:cancel(TRef)),
{reply, ok, S#ch_mgr{timer=undefined}};
_ ->
{reply, error, S}
end;
handle_call({stop}, _From, S) ->
{stop, normal, ok, S};
handle_call({test_calc_projection, KeepRunenvP}, _From,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName}=S) ->
RelativeToServer = MyName,
{P, S2} = calc_projection(S, RelativeToServer),
{reply, {ok, P}, if KeepRunenvP -> S2;
true -> S
end};
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
handle_call({test_write_public_projection, Proj}, _From, S) ->
{Res, S2} = do_cl_write_public_proj(Proj, S),
{reply, Res, S2};
handle_call({test_read_latest_public_projection, ReadRepairP}, _From, S) ->
{Perhaps, Val, ExtraInfo, S2} =
do_cl_read_latest_public_projection(ReadRepairP, S),
Res = {Perhaps, Val, ExtraInfo},
{reply, Res, S2};
handle_call({test_react_to_env}, _From, S) ->
{TODOtodo, S2} = do_react_to_env(S),
{reply, TODOtodo, S2};
handle_call(_Call, _From, S) ->
{reply, whaaaaaaaaaa, S}.
handle_cast(_Cast, S) ->
?D({cast_whaaaaaaaaaaa, _Cast}),
{noreply, S}.
handle_info(tick_check_environment, #ch_mgr{ignore_timer=true}=S) ->
{noreply, S};
handle_info(tick_check_environment, S) ->
{{_Delta, Props, _Epoch}, S1} = do_react_to_env(S),
S2 = sanitize_repair_state(S1),
S3 = perhaps_start_repair(S2),
case proplists:get_value(throttle_seconds, Props) of
N when is_integer(N), N > 0 ->
%% We are flapping. Set ignore_timer=true and schedule a
%% reminder to stop ignoring. This slows down the rate of
%% flapping. If/when the yo:tell_author_yo() function in
%% state C200 is ever implemented, then it should be
%% implemented via the test_react_to_env style.
erlang:send_after(N*1000, self(), stop_ignoring_timer),
{noreply, S3#ch_mgr{ignore_timer=true}};
_ ->
{noreply, S3}
end;
handle_info(stop_ignoring_timer, S) ->
{noreply, S#ch_mgr{ignore_timer=false}};
handle_info({'DOWN',_Ref,process,Worker,Res},
#ch_mgr{repair_worker=Worker}=S)->
{noreply, S#ch_mgr{ignore_timer=false,
repair_worker=undefined,
repair_final_status=Res}};
handle_info(Msg, S) ->
case get(todo_bummer) of undefined -> io:format("TODO: got ~p\n", [Msg]);
_ -> ok
end,
put(todo_bummer, true),
{noreply, S}.
terminate(_Reason, _S) ->
ok.
code_change(_OldVsn, S, _Extra) ->
{ok, S}.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
make_none_projection(MyName, All_list, MembersDict) ->
Down_list = All_list,
UPI_list = [],
machi_projection:new(MyName, MembersDict, Down_list, UPI_list, [], []).
get_my_private_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, DefaultDict, DefaultProj) ->
get_my_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, DefaultDict, DefaultProj, private).
get_my_public_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, DefaultDict, DefaultProj) ->
get_my_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, DefaultDict, DefaultProj, public).
get_my_proj_boot_info(MgrOpts, DefaultDict, DefaultProj, ProjType) ->
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
case proplists:get_value(projection_store_registered_name, MgrOpts) of
undefined ->
{DefaultDict, DefaultProj};
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
Store ->
{ok, P} = machi_projection_store:read_latest_projection(Store,
ProjType),
{P#projection_v1.members_dict, P}
2015-05-01 05:51:42 +00:00
end.
%% Write the epoch 0 projection store, to assist bootstrapping. If the
%% 0th epoch is already written, there's no problem.
store_zeroth_projection_maybe(ZeroProj, MgrOpts) ->
case proplists:get_value(projection_store_registered_name, MgrOpts) of
undefined ->
ok;
Store ->
_ = machi_projection_store:write(Store, public, ZeroProj),
_ = machi_projection_store:write(Store, private, ZeroProj),
ok
end.
set_active_timer(#ch_mgr{name=MyName, members_dict=MembersDict}=S) ->
2015-04-09 12:08:15 +00:00
FLU_list = [P#p_srvr.name || {_,P} <- orddict:to_list(MembersDict)],
%% Perturb the order a little bit, to avoid near-lock-step
%% operations every few ticks.
MSec = calc_sleep_ranked_order(400, 1500, MyName, FLU_list) +
random:uniform(100),
{ok, TRef} = timer:send_interval(MSec, tick_check_environment),
S#ch_mgr{timer=TRef}.
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
do_cl_write_public_proj(Proj, S) ->
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch} = Proj,
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
cl_write_public_proj(Epoch, Proj, S).
cl_write_public_proj(Epoch, Proj, S) ->
cl_write_public_proj(Epoch, Proj, false, S).
cl_write_public_proj_skip_local_error(Epoch, Proj, S) ->
cl_write_public_proj(Epoch, Proj, true, S).
cl_write_public_proj(Epoch, Proj, SkipLocalWriteErrorP, S) ->
%% Write to local public projection store first, and if it succeeds,
%% then write to all remote public projection stores.
cl_write_public_proj_local(Epoch, Proj, SkipLocalWriteErrorP, S).
cl_write_public_proj_local(Epoch, Proj, SkipLocalWriteErrorP,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName}=S) ->
{_UpNodes, Partitions, S2} = calc_up_nodes(S),
Res0 = perhaps_call_t(
S, Partitions, MyName,
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
fun(Pid) -> ?FLU_PC:write_projection(Pid, public, Proj, ?TO) end),
Continue = fun() ->
FLUs = Proj#projection_v1.all_members -- [MyName],
cl_write_public_proj_remote(FLUs, Partitions, Epoch, Proj, S)
end,
case Res0 of
ok ->
{XX, SS} = Continue(),
{{local_write_result, ok, XX}, SS};
Else when SkipLocalWriteErrorP ->
{XX, SS} = Continue(),
{{local_write_result, Else, XX}, SS};
Else ->
{Else, S2}
end.
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
cl_write_public_proj_remote(FLUs, Partitions, _Epoch, Proj, S) ->
%% We're going to be very care-free about this write because we'll rely
%% on the read side to do any read repair.
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
DoIt = fun(Pid) -> ?FLU_PC:write_projection(Pid, public, Proj, ?TO) end,
Rs = [{FLU, perhaps_call_t(S, Partitions, FLU, fun(Pid) -> DoIt(Pid) end)} ||
FLU <- FLUs],
{{remote_write_results, Rs}, S}.
do_cl_read_latest_public_projection(ReadRepairP,
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
#ch_mgr{proj=Proj1} = S) ->
_Epoch1 = Proj1#projection_v1.epoch_number,
case cl_read_latest_projection(public, S) of
{needs_repair, FLUsRs, Extra, S3} ->
if not ReadRepairP ->
2015-04-30 14:16:08 +00:00
{not_unanimous, todoxyz, [{unanimous_flus, []},
{results, FLUsRs}|Extra], S3};
true ->
{_Status, S4} = do_read_repair(FLUsRs, Extra, S3),
do_cl_read_latest_public_projection(ReadRepairP, S4)
end;
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
{_UnanimousTag, _Proj2, _Extra, _S3}=Else ->
Else
end.
read_latest_projection_call_only(ProjectionType, AllHosed,
#ch_mgr{proj=CurrentProj}=S) ->
#projection_v1{all_members=All_list} = CurrentProj,
All_queried_list = All_list -- AllHosed,
{_UpNodes, Partitions, S2} = calc_up_nodes(S),
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
DoIt = fun(Pid) ->
case (?FLU_PC:read_latest_projection(Pid, ProjectionType, ?TO)) of
{ok, P} -> P;
Else -> Else
end
end,
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
Rs = [perhaps_call_t(S, Partitions, FLU, fun(Pid) -> DoIt(Pid) end) ||
FLU <- All_queried_list],
%% Rs = [perhaps_call_t(S, Partitions, FLU, fun(Pid) -> DoIt(Pid) end) ||
%% FLU <- All_queried_list],
FLUsRs = lists:zip(All_queried_list, Rs),
{All_queried_list, FLUsRs, S2}.
cl_read_latest_projection(ProjectionType, S) ->
AllHosed = [],
cl_read_latest_projection(ProjectionType, AllHosed, S).
cl_read_latest_projection(ProjectionType, AllHosed, S) ->
{All_queried_list, FLUsRs, S2} =
read_latest_projection_call_only(ProjectionType, AllHosed, S),
rank_and_sort_projections_with_extra(All_queried_list, FLUsRs,
ProjectionType, S2).
rank_and_sort_projections_with_extra(All_queried_list, FLUsRs, ProjectionType,
2015-04-30 14:16:08 +00:00
#ch_mgr{name=MyName,proj=CurrentProj}=S) ->
UnwrittenRs = [x || {_, {error, not_written}} <- FLUsRs],
Ps = [Proj || {_FLU, Proj} <- FLUsRs, is_record(Proj, projection_v1)],
BadAnswerFLUs = [FLU || {FLU, Answer} <- FLUsRs,
not is_record(Answer, projection_v1)],
if All_queried_list == []
orelse
length(UnwrittenRs) == length(FLUsRs) ->
2015-04-30 14:16:08 +00:00
NoneProj = make_none_projection(MyName, [], orddict:new()),
Extra2 = [{all_members_replied, true},
{all_queried_list, All_queried_list},
{flus_rs, FLUsRs},
{unanimous_flus,[]},
{not_unanimous_flus, []},
{bad_answer_flus, BadAnswerFLUs},
{not_unanimous_answers, []},
{trans_all_hosed, []},
{trans_all_flap_counts, []}],
{not_unanimous, NoneProj, Extra2, S};
ProjectionType == public, UnwrittenRs /= [] ->
{needs_repair, FLUsRs, [flarfus], S};
true ->
[{_Rank, BestProj}|_] = rank_and_sort_projections(Ps, CurrentProj),
NotBestPs = [Proj || Proj <- Ps, Proj /= BestProj],
UnanimousTag = if NotBestPs == [] -> unanimous;
true -> not_unanimous
end,
Extra = [{all_members_replied, length(FLUsRs) == length(All_queried_list)}],
Best_FLUs = [FLU || {FLU, Projx} <- FLUsRs, Projx == BestProj],
TransAllHosed = lists:usort(
lists:flatten([get_all_hosed(P) || P <- Ps])),
AllFlapCounts = merge_flap_counts([get_all_flap_counts(P) ||
P <- Ps]),
Extra2 = [{all_queried_list, All_queried_list},
{flus_rs, FLUsRs},
{unanimous_flus,Best_FLUs},
{not_unanimous_flus, All_queried_list --
(Best_FLUs ++ BadAnswerFLUs)},
{bad_answer_flus, BadAnswerFLUs},
{not_unanimous_answers, NotBestPs},
{trans_all_hosed, TransAllHosed},
{trans_all_flap_counts, AllFlapCounts}|Extra],
{UnanimousTag, BestProj, Extra2, S}
end.
do_read_repair(FLUsRs, _Extra, #ch_mgr{proj=CurrentProj} = S) ->
Unwrittens = [x || {_FLU, {error, not_written}} <- FLUsRs],
Ps = [Proj || {_FLU, Proj} <- FLUsRs, is_record(Proj, projection_v1)],
if Unwrittens == [] orelse Ps == [] ->
{nothing_to_do, S};
true ->
%% We have at least one unwritten and also at least one proj.
%% Pick the best one, then spam it everywhere.
[{_Rank, BestProj}|_] = rank_and_sort_projections(Ps, CurrentProj),
Epoch = BestProj#projection_v1.epoch_number,
%% We're doing repair, so use the flavor that will
%% continue to all others even if there is an
%% error_written on the local FLU.
{_DontCare, _S2}=Res = cl_write_public_proj_skip_local_error(
Epoch, BestProj, S),
Res
end.
calc_projection(S, RelativeToServer) ->
calc_projection(S, RelativeToServer, []).
calc_projection(#ch_mgr{proj=LastProj, runenv=RunEnv} = S,
RelativeToServer, AllHosed) ->
Dbg = [],
OldThreshold = proplists:get_value(old_threshold, RunEnv),
NoPartitionThreshold = proplists:get_value(no_partition_threshold, RunEnv),
calc_projection(OldThreshold, NoPartitionThreshold, LastProj,
RelativeToServer, AllHosed, Dbg, S).
%% OldThreshold: Percent chance of using the old/previous network partition list
%% NoPartitionThreshold: If the network partition changes, what percent chance
%% that there are no partitions at all?
%% AllHosed: FLUs that we must treat as if they are down, e.g., we are
%% in a flapping situation and wish to ignore FLUs that we
%% believe are bad-behaving causes of our flapping.
calc_projection(_OldThreshold, _NoPartitionThreshold, LastProj,
RelativeToServer, AllHosed, Dbg,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName,
runenv=RunEnv1,
repair_final_status=RepairFS}=S) ->
#projection_v1{epoch_number=OldEpochNum,
members_dict=MembersDict,
upi=OldUPI_list,
repairing=OldRepairing_list
} = LastProj,
LastUp = lists:usort(OldUPI_list ++ OldRepairing_list),
AllMembers = (S#ch_mgr.proj)#projection_v1.all_members,
{Up0, Partitions, RunEnv2} = calc_up_nodes(MyName,
AllMembers, RunEnv1),
Up = Up0 -- AllHosed,
NewUp = Up -- LastUp,
Down = AllMembers -- Up,
NewUPI_list = [X || X <- OldUPI_list, lists:member(X, Up)],
2015-05-08 06:36:53 +00:00
LastInNewUPI = case NewUPI_list of
[] -> does_not_exist_because_upi_is_empty;
[_|_] -> lists:last(NewUPI_list)
end,
Repairing_list2 = [X || X <- OldRepairing_list, lists:member(X, Up)],
2015-05-08 06:36:53 +00:00
Simulator_p = proplists:get_value(use_partition_simulator, RunEnv2, false),
{NewUPI_list3, Repairing_list3, RunEnv3} =
case {NewUp, Repairing_list2} of
{[], []} ->
D_foo=[],
{NewUPI_list, [], RunEnv2};
2015-05-08 06:36:53 +00:00
{[], [H|T]} when RelativeToServer == LastInNewUPI ->
%% The author is tail of the UPI list. Let's see if
%% *everyone* in the UPI+repairing lists are using our
%% projection. This is to simulate a requirement that repair
%% a real repair process cannot take place until the chain is
%% stable, i.e. everyone is in the same epoch.
%% TODO create a real API call for fetching this info?
SameEpoch_p = check_latest_private_projections_same_epoch(
2015-06-04 05:31:58 +00:00
NewUPI_list ++ Repairing_list2,
S#ch_mgr.proj, Partitions, S),
if Simulator_p andalso SameEpoch_p ->
D_foo=[{repair_airquote_done, {we_agree, (S#ch_mgr.proj)#projection_v1.epoch_number}}],
2015-05-08 06:36:53 +00:00
{NewUPI_list ++ [H], T, RunEnv2};
not Simulator_p
andalso
RepairFS == {repair_final_status, ok} ->
D_foo=[{repair_done, {repair_final_status, ok, (S#ch_mgr.proj)#projection_v1.epoch_number}}],
{NewUPI_list ++ Repairing_list2, [], RunEnv2};
2015-05-08 06:36:53 +00:00
true ->
D_foo=[],
{NewUPI_list, OldRepairing_list, RunEnv2}
end;
{_, _} ->
D_foo=[],
{NewUPI_list, OldRepairing_list, RunEnv2}
end,
Repairing_list4 = case NewUp of
[] -> Repairing_list3;
NewUp -> Repairing_list3 ++ NewUp
end,
Repairing_list5 = Repairing_list4 -- Down,
TentativeUPI = NewUPI_list3,
TentativeRepairing = Repairing_list5,
{NewUPI, NewRepairing} =
if TentativeUPI == [] andalso TentativeRepairing /= [] ->
[FirstRepairing|TailRepairing] = TentativeRepairing,
{[FirstRepairing], TailRepairing};
true ->
{TentativeUPI, TentativeRepairing}
end,
P = machi_projection:new(OldEpochNum + 1,
MyName, MembersDict, Down, NewUPI, NewRepairing,
D_foo ++
Dbg ++ [{ps, Partitions},{nodes_up, Up}]),
{P, S#ch_mgr{runenv=RunEnv3}}.
check_latest_private_projections_same_epoch(FLUs, MyProj, Partitions, S) ->
2015-06-04 05:31:58 +00:00
%% NOTE: The caller must provide us with the FLUs list for all
%% FLUs that must be up & available right now. So any
%% failure of perhaps_call_t() means that we must return
%% false.
FoldFun = fun(_FLU, false) ->
false;
(FLU, true) ->
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
F = fun(Pid) ->
?FLU_PC:read_latest_projection(Pid, private, ?TO)
end,
case perhaps_call_t(S, Partitions, FLU, F) of
{ok, RemotePrivateProj} ->
if MyProj#projection_v1.epoch_number ==
RemotePrivateProj#projection_v1.epoch_number
andalso
MyProj#projection_v1.epoch_csum ==
RemotePrivateProj#projection_v1.epoch_csum ->
true;
true ->
false
end;
_ ->
false
end
end,
lists:foldl(FoldFun, true, FLUs).
calc_up_nodes(#ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj=Proj, runenv=RunEnv1}=S) ->
AllMembers = Proj#projection_v1.all_members,
{UpNodes, Partitions, RunEnv2} =
calc_up_nodes(MyName, AllMembers, RunEnv1),
{UpNodes, Partitions, S#ch_mgr{runenv=RunEnv2}}.
calc_up_nodes(MyName, AllMembers, RunEnv1) ->
case proplists:get_value(use_partition_simulator, RunEnv1) of
true ->
calc_up_nodes_sim(MyName, AllMembers, RunEnv1);
false ->
{AllMembers -- get(remember_partition_hack), [], RunEnv1}
end.
calc_up_nodes_sim(MyName, AllMembers, RunEnv1) ->
{Partitions2, Islands2} = machi_partition_simulator:get(AllMembers),
catch ?REACT({calc_up_nodes,?LINE,[{partitions,Partitions2},
{islands,Islands2}]}),
UpNodes = lists:sort(
[Node || Node <- AllMembers,
not lists:member({MyName, Node}, Partitions2),
not lists:member({Node, MyName}, Partitions2)]),
RunEnv2 = replace(RunEnv1,
[{network_partitions, Partitions2},
{network_islands, Islands2},
{up_nodes, UpNodes}]),
{UpNodes, Partitions2, RunEnv2}.
replace(PropList, Items) ->
Tmp = Items ++ PropList,
[{K, proplists:get_value(K, Tmp)} || K <- proplists:get_keys(Tmp)].
rank_and_sort_projections([], CurrentProj) ->
rank_projections([CurrentProj], CurrentProj);
rank_and_sort_projections(Ps, CurrentProj) ->
Epoch = lists:max([Proj#projection_v1.epoch_number || Proj <- Ps]),
MaxPs = [Proj || Proj <- Ps,
Proj#projection_v1.epoch_number == Epoch],
%% Sort with highest rank first (custom sort)
lists:sort(fun({RankA,_}, {RankB,_}) -> RankA > RankB end,
rank_projections(MaxPs, CurrentProj)).
%% Caller must ensure all Projs are of the same epoch number.
%% If the caller gives us projections with different epochs, we assume
%% that the caller is doing an OK thing.
%%
%% TODO: This implementation currently gives higher rank to the last
%% member of All_list, which is typically/always/TODO-CLARIFY
%% sorted. That's fine, but there's a source of unnecessary
%% churn: during repair, we assume that the head of the chain is
%% the coordinator of the repair. So any time that the head
%% makes a repair-related transition, that projection may get
%% quickly replaced by an identical projection that merely has
%% higher rank because it's authored by a higher-ranked member.
%% Worst case, for chain len=4:
%% E+0: author=a, upi=[a], repairing=[b,c,d]
%% E+1: author=b, upi=[a], repairing=[b,c,d] (**)
%% E+2: author=c, upi=[a], repairing=[b,c,d] (**)
%% E+3: author=d, upi=[a], repairing=[b,c,d] (**)
%% E+4: author=a, upi=[a,b], repairing=[c,d]
%% E+5: author=b, upi=[a,b], repairing=[c,d] (**)
%% E+6: author=c, upi=[a,b], repairing=[c,d] (**)
%% E+7: author=d, upi=[a,b], repairing=[c,d] (**)
%% E+... 6 more (**) epochs when c &amp; d finish their repairs.
%% Ideally, the "(**)" epochs are avoidable churn.
%% Perhaps this means that we should change the responsibility
%% for repair management to the highest ranking member of the
%% UPI_list?
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% TODO Hrrrmmmmm ... what about the TODO comment in A40's A40a clause?
%% That could perhaps resolve this same problem in a better way?
rank_projections(Projs, CurrentProj) ->
#projection_v1{all_members=All_list} = CurrentProj,
MemberRank = orddict:from_list(
lists:zip(All_list, lists:seq(1, length(All_list)))),
N = ?MAX_CHAIN_LENGTH + 1,
[{rank_projection(Proj, MemberRank, N), Proj} || Proj <- Projs].
rank_projection(#projection_v1{upi=[]}, _MemberRank, _N) ->
-100;
rank_projection(#projection_v1{author_server=_Author,
upi=UPI_list,
repairing=Repairing_list}, _MemberRank, N) ->
%% It's possible that there's "cross-talk" across projection
%% stores. For example, we were a chain of [a,b], then the
%% administrator sets a's members_dict to include only a.
%% However, b is still running and has written a public projection
%% suggestion to a, and a has seen it. (Or perhaps b has old
%% chain information from one/many configurations ago, and its
%% projection store was not wiped clean, then b was restarted &
%% begins using its local outdated projection information.)
%%
%% Server b is no longer a member of a's MemberRank scheme, so we
%% need to compensate for this by giving b an extremely low author
%% ranking.
AuthorRank = 0,
%% AuthorRank = case orddict:find(Author, MemberRank) of
%% {ok, Rank} -> Rank;
%% error -> -(N*N*N*N)
%% end,
AuthorRank +
( N * length(Repairing_list)) +
(N*N * length(UPI_list)).
do_set_chain_members_dict(MembersDict, #ch_mgr{proxies_dict=OldProxiesDict}=S)->
2015-05-17 14:48:05 +00:00
_ = ?FLU_PC:stop_proxies(OldProxiesDict),
ProxiesDict = ?FLU_PC:start_proxies(MembersDict),
{ok, S#ch_mgr{members_dict=MembersDict,
2015-05-17 14:48:05 +00:00
proxies_dict=ProxiesDict}}.
do_react_to_env(#ch_mgr{name=MyName,
proj=#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch,
members_dict=[]=OldDict}=OldProj,
opts=Opts}=S) ->
%% Read from our local *public* projection store. If some other
%% chain member has written something there, and if we are a
%% member of that chain, then we'll adopt that projection and then
%% start actively humming in that chain.
{NewMembersDict, NewProj} =
get_my_public_proj_boot_info(Opts, OldDict, OldProj),
case orddict:is_key(MyName, NewMembersDict) of
false ->
{{empty_members_dict, [], Epoch}, S};
true ->
{_, S2} = do_set_chain_members_dict(NewMembersDict, S),
{{empty_members_dict, [], Epoch},
S2#ch_mgr{proj=NewProj, members_dict=NewMembersDict}}
end;
do_react_to_env(S) ->
put(react, []),
react_to_env_A10(S).
react_to_env_A10(S) ->
?REACT(a10),
react_to_env_A20(0, S).
react_to_env_A20(Retries, #ch_mgr{name=MyName}=S) ->
?REACT(a20),
init_remember_partition_hack(),
{UnanimousTag, P_latest, ReadExtra, S2} =
do_cl_read_latest_public_projection(true, S),
LastComplaint = get(rogue_server_epoch),
case orddict:is_key(P_latest#projection_v1.author_server,
S#ch_mgr.members_dict) of
false when P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number /= LastComplaint ->
put(rogue_server_epoch, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number),
Rogue = P_latest#projection_v1.author_server,
error_logger:info_msg("Chain manager ~w found latest public "
"projection ~w has author ~w not a member "
"of our members list ~w. Please check "
"chain membership on this "
"rogue chain manager ~w.\n",
[S#ch_mgr.name,
P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number,
Rogue,
[K || {K,_} <- orddict:to_list(S#ch_mgr.members_dict)],
Rogue]);
_ ->
ok
end,
case lists:member(MyName, P_latest#projection_v1.all_members) of
2015-05-11 10:00:21 +00:00
false when P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number /= LastComplaint,
P_latest#projection_v1.all_members /= [] ->
put(rogue_server_epoch, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number),
error_logger:info_msg("Chain manager ~p found latest public "
"projection ~p has author ~p has a "
"members list ~p that does not include me.\n",
[S#ch_mgr.name,
P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number,
P_latest#projection_v1.author_server,
P_latest#projection_v1.all_members]);
_ ->
ok
end,
%% The UnanimousTag isn't quite sufficient for our needs. We need
%% to determine if *all* of the UPI+Repairing FLUs are members of
%% the unanimous server replies. All Repairing FLUs should be up
%% now (because if they aren't then they cannot be repairing), so
%% all Repairing FLUs have no non-race excuse not to be in UnanimousFLUs.
UnanimousFLUs = lists:sort(proplists:get_value(unanimous_flus, ReadExtra)),
UPI_Repairing_FLUs = lists:sort(P_latest#projection_v1.upi ++
P_latest#projection_v1.repairing),
All_UPI_Repairing_were_unanimous =
ordsets:is_subset(ordsets:from_list(UPI_Repairing_FLUs),
ordsets:from_list(UnanimousFLUs)),
NotUnanimousFLUs = lists:sort(proplists:get_value(not_unanimous_flus,
ReadExtra, [xxx])),
NotUnanimousPs = lists:sort(proplists:get_value(not_unanimous_answers,
ReadExtra, [xxx])),
NotUnanimousSumms = [machi_projection:make_summary(
P#projection_v1{dbg2=[omitted]}) ||
P <- NotUnanimousPs,
is_record(P, projection_v1)],
BadAnswerFLUs = lists:sort(proplists:get_value(bad_answer_flus, ReadExtra)),
?REACT({a20,?LINE,[{upi_repairing,UPI_Repairing_FLUs},
{unanimous_flus,UnanimousFLUs},
{all_upi_repairing_were_unanimous,All_UPI_Repairing_were_unanimous},
{not_unanimous_flus, NotUnanimousFLUs},
{not_unanimous_answers, NotUnanimousSumms},
{bad_answer_flus, BadAnswerFLUs}
]}),
LatestUnanimousP =
if UnanimousTag == unanimous
andalso
All_UPI_Repairing_were_unanimous ->
?REACT({a20,?LINE}),
true;
UnanimousTag == unanimous ->
?REACT({a20,?LINE}),
false;
UnanimousTag == not_unanimous ->
?REACT({a20,?LINE}),
false;
true ->
exit({badbad, UnanimousTag})
end,
react_to_env_A30(Retries, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP, ReadExtra, S2).
react_to_env_A30(Retries, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP, _ReadExtra,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj=P_current,
flap_limit=FlapLimit} = S) ->
?REACT(a30),
{P_newprop1, S2} = calc_projection(S, MyName),
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, [{current, machi_projection:make_summary(S#ch_mgr.proj)}]}),
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, [{newprop1, machi_projection:make_summary(P_newprop1)}]}),
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, [{latest, machi_projection:make_summary(P_latest)}]}),
%% Are we flapping yet?
{P_newprop2, S3} = calculate_flaps(P_newprop1, P_current, FlapLimit, S2),
%% Move the epoch number up ... originally done in C300.
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch_newprop2}=P_newprop2,
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch_latest,
author_server=Author_latest}=P_latest,
NewEpoch = erlang:max(Epoch_newprop2, Epoch_latest) + 1,
P_newprop3 = P_newprop2#projection_v1{epoch_number=NewEpoch},
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, [{newprop3, machi_projection:make_summary(P_newprop3)}]}),
{P_newprop10, S10} =
case get_flap_count(P_newprop3) of
{_, P_newprop3_flap_count} when P_newprop3_flap_count >= FlapLimit ->
AllHosed = get_all_hosed(P_newprop3),
P_current_inner = inner_projection_or_self(P_current),
{P_i, S_i} = calc_projection(unused, unused,
P_current_inner,
MyName, AllHosed, [], S),
%% The inner projection will have a fake author, which
%% everyone will agree is the largest UPI member's
%% name.
BiggestUPIMember =
if P_i#projection_v1.upi == [] ->
%% Oops, ok, fall back to author
P_i#projection_v1.author_server;
true ->
lists:last(lists:sort(P_i#projection_v1.upi))
end,
P_i2 = P_i#projection_v1{author_server=BiggestUPIMember},
P_inner = case lists:member(MyName, AllHosed) of
false ->
P_i2;
true ->
P_i2#projection_v1{
upi=[MyName],
repairing=[],
down=P_i2#projection_v1.all_members
-- [MyName]}
end,
FinalInnerEpoch =
case inner_projection_exists(P_current) of
false ->
FinalCreation = P_newprop3#projection_v1.creation_time,
AllFlapCounts_epk =
[Epk || {{Epk,_FlTime}, _FlCount} <-
get_all_flap_counts(P_newprop3)],
case AllFlapCounts_epk of
[] ->
P_newprop3#projection_v1.epoch_number;
[_|_] ->
lists:max(AllFlapCounts_epk)
end;
true ->
P_oldinner = inner_projection_or_self(P_current),
if P_oldinner#projection_v1.upi ==
P_inner#projection_v1.upi
andalso
P_oldinner#projection_v1.repairing ==
P_inner#projection_v1.repairing
andalso
P_oldinner#projection_v1.down ==
P_inner#projection_v1.down ->
FinalCreation = P_oldinner#projection_v1.creation_time,
P_oldinner#projection_v1.epoch_number;
true ->
FinalCreation = P_newprop3#projection_v1.creation_time,
P_oldinner#projection_v1.epoch_number + 1
end
end,
%% TODO: When we implement the real chain repair function, we
%% need to keep in mind that an inner projection with
%% up nodes > 1, repair is required there! In the
%% current simulator, repair is not simulated and
%% finished (and then growing the UPI list). Fix.
P_inner2 = machi_projection:update_checksum(
P_inner#projection_v1{epoch_number=FinalInnerEpoch,
creation_time=FinalCreation}),
InnerInfo = [],
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, [{inner_summary,
machi_projection:make_summary(P_inner2)}]}),
P_newprop4 = machi_projection:update_checksum(
P_newprop3#projection_v1{inner=P_inner2}),
{P_newprop4, S_i};
{_, P_newprop3_flap_count} ->
?REACT({a30, ?LINE,[{newprop3_flap_count,P_newprop3_flap_count},
{flap_limit, FlapLimit}]}),
{P_newprop3, S3}
end,
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% Here's a more common reason for moving from inner projection to
%% a normal projection: the old proj has an inner but the newprop
%% does not.
MoveFromInnerToNorm_p =
case {inner_projection_exists(P_current),
inner_projection_exists(P_newprop10)} of
{true, false} -> true;
{_, _} -> false
end,
%% If P_current says that we believe that we're currently flapping,
%% and if P_newprop10 says that we're no longer flapping, then we
%% really ought to stop flapping, right.
%%
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% Not quite so simple....
%%
%% AAAAH, right. The case I'm dealing with right now is an asymmetric
%% partition in a 4 member chain that affects all_hosed=[a,b,c] but
%% member D is *NOT* noticing anything different in the current scheme:
%% {inner_projection_exists(current), inner_projection_exists(new)}
%% is {true, true}.
%% Yes, that hypothesis is confirmed by time-honored io:format() tracing.
%%
%% So, we need something to kick a silly member like 'd' out of its
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% rut of am-still-flapping. So, let's try this:
%% If we see a P_latest from author != MyName, and if P_latest's
%% author's flap count is now 0 (latest!), but that same member's
%% flap count in P_current is non-zero, then we assume that author
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% has moved out of flapping state and that therefore we ought to do
%% the same.
%% Remember! P_current is this manager's private in-use projection.
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% It is always less than or equal to P_latest's epoch!
Current_flap_counts = get_all_flap_counts(P_current),
Latest_authors_flap_count_current = proplists:get_value(
Author_latest, Current_flap_counts),
Latest_flap_counts = get_all_flap_counts(P_latest),
Latest_authors_flap_count_latest = proplists:get_value(
Author_latest, Latest_flap_counts),
Kicker_p = case {Latest_authors_flap_count_current,
Latest_authors_flap_count_latest} of
{NotUndef, undefined} when NotUndef /= undefined ->
true;
{_, _} ->
false
end,
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
if MoveFromInnerToNorm_p orelse Kicker_p ->
ClauseInfo = [{inner_kicker, Kicker_p},
{inner_kicker2, {Latest_authors_flap_count_current,
Latest_authors_flap_count_latest}},
{move_from_inner, MoveFromInnerToNorm_p}],
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, ClauseInfo}),
%% Move from inner projection to outer.
P_inner2A = inner_projection_or_self(P_current),
ResetEpoch = P_newprop10#projection_v1.epoch_number,
ResetAuthor = case P_current#projection_v1.upi of
[] ->
%% Drat, fall back to current's author.
P_current#projection_v1.author_server;
_ ->
lists:last(P_current#projection_v1.upi)
end,
ClauseInfo2 = [{move_from_inner_to_outer, true},
{old_author, P_inner2A#projection_v1.author_server},
{reset_author, ResetAuthor},
{reset_epoch, ResetEpoch}],
P_inner2B =
machi_projection:update_checksum(
P_inner2A#projection_v1{epoch_number=ResetEpoch,
author_server=ResetAuthor,
dbg=ClauseInfo++ClauseInfo2}),
ReactI = [{inner2b,machi_projection:make_summary(P_inner2B)}],
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, ReactI}),
%% In the past, we've tried:
%% react_to_env_C100(P_inner2B, P_latest, S);
%%
%% But we *know* that direct transition is racy/buggy: if
%% P_latest UPIs are not unanimous, then we run the risk of
%% non-disjoint UPIs; state B10 exists for a reason!
%%
%% So, we're going to use P_inner2B as our new proposal and run
%% it through the regular system, as we did prior to 2015-04-14.
react_to_env_A40(Retries, P_inner2B, P_latest,
LatestUnanimousP, S10);
true ->
?REACT({a30, ?LINE, []}),
react_to_env_A40(Retries, P_newprop10, P_latest,
LatestUnanimousP, S10)
end.
react_to_env_A40(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj=P_current}=S) ->
?REACT(a40),
[{Rank_newprop, _}] = rank_projections([P_newprop], P_current),
[{Rank_latest, _}] = rank_projections([P_latest], P_current),
LatestAuthorDownP = lists:member(P_latest#projection_v1.author_server,
P_newprop#projection_v1.down),
if
%% Epoch == 0 is reserved for first-time, just booting conditions.
(P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number > 0
andalso
P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number > P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number)
orelse
not LatestUnanimousP ->
?REACT({a40, ?LINE,
[{latest_epoch, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{current_epoch, P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{latest_unanimous_p, LatestUnanimousP}]}),
%% 1st clause: someone else has written a newer projection
%% 2nd clause: a network partition has healed, revealing a
%% differing opinion.
react_to_env_B10(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
Rank_newprop, Rank_latest, S);
P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number < P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number
orelse
P_latest /= P_current ->
?REACT({a40, ?LINE,
[{latest_epoch, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{current_epoch, P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{neq, P_latest /= P_current}]}),
%% Both of these cases are rare. Elsewhere, the code
%% assumes that the local FLU's projection store is always
%% available, so reads & writes to it aren't going to fail
%% willy-nilly. If that assumption is true, then we can
%% reason as follows:
%%
%% a. If we can always read from the local FLU projection
%% store, then the 1st clause isn't possible because
%% P_latest's epoch # must be at least as large as
%% P_current's epoch #
%%
%% b. If P_latest /= P_current, then there can't be a
%% unanimous reply for P_latest, so the earlier 'if'
%% clause would be triggered and so we could never reach
%% this clause.
%%
%% I'm keeping this 'if' clause just in case the local FLU
%% projection store assumption changes.
react_to_env_B10(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
Rank_newprop, Rank_latest, S);
%% A40a (see flowchart)
Rank_newprop > Rank_latest ->
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
?REACT({a40, ?LINE,
[{rank_latest, Rank_latest},
{rank_newprop, Rank_newprop},
{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server}]}),
%% TODO: There may be an "improvement" here. If we're the
%% highest-ranking FLU in the all_members list, then if we make a
%% projection where our UPI list is the same as P_latest's, and
%% our repairing list is the same as P_latest's, then it may not
%% be necessary to write our projection: it doesn't "improve"
%% anything UPI-wise or repairing-wise. But it isn't clear to me
%% if it's 100% correct to "improve" here and skip writing
%% P_newprop, yet.
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
%% A40b (see flowchart)
P_latest#projection_v1.author_server == MyName
andalso
(P_newprop#projection_v1.upi /= P_latest#projection_v1.upi
orelse
P_newprop#projection_v1.repairing /= P_latest#projection_v1.repairing) ->
?REACT({a40, ?LINE,
[{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server},
{newprop_upi, P_newprop#projection_v1.upi},
{latest_upi, P_latest#projection_v1.upi},
{newprop_repairing, P_newprop#projection_v1.repairing},
{latest_repairing, P_latest#projection_v1.repairing}]}),
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
%% A40c (see flowchart)
LatestAuthorDownP ->
?REACT({a40, ?LINE,
[{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server},
{author_is_down_p, LatestAuthorDownP}]}),
%% TODO: I believe that membership in the
%% P_newprop#projection_v1.down is not sufficient for long
%% chains. Rather, we ought to be using a full broadcast
%% gossip of server up status.
%%
%% Imagine 5 servers in an "Olympic Rings" style
%% overlapping network paritition, where ring1 = upper
%% leftmost and ring5 = upper rightmost. It's both
%% possible and desirable for ring5's projection to be
%% seen (public) by ring1. Ring5's projection's rank is
%% definitely higher than ring1's proposed projection's
%% rank ... but we're in a crazy netsplit where:
%% * if we accept ring5's proj: only one functioning chain
%% ([ring4,ring5] but stable
%% * if we accept ring1's proj: two functioning chains
%% ([ring1,ring2] and [ring4,ring5] indepependently)
%% but unstable: we're probably going to flap back & forth?!
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
true ->
?REACT({a40, ?LINE, [true]}),
FinalProps = [{throttle_seconds, 0}],
react_to_env_A50(P_latest, FinalProps, S)
end.
react_to_env_A50(P_latest, FinalProps, S) ->
?REACT(a50),
?REACT({a50, ?LINE, [{latest_epoch, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{final_props, FinalProps}]}),
{{no_change, FinalProps, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number}, S}.
react_to_env_B10(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
Rank_newprop, Rank_latest,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName, flap_limit=FlapLimit}=S)->
?REACT(b10),
{_P_newprop_flap_time, P_newprop_flap_count} = get_flap_count(P_newprop),
UnanimousLatestInnerNotRelevant_p =
case inner_projection_exists(P_latest) of
true when P_latest#projection_v1.author_server /= MyName ->
#projection_v1{down=Down_inner} = inner_projection_or_self(
P_latest),
case lists:member(MyName, Down_inner) of
true ->
%% Some foreign author's inner projection thinks that
%% I'm down. Silly! We ought to ignore this one.
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [{down_inner, Down_inner}]}),
true;
false ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [{down_inner, Down_inner}]}),
false
end;
_Else_u ->
false
end,
if
LatestUnanimousP
andalso
UnanimousLatestInnerNotRelevant_p ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, []}),
put(b10_hack, false),
%% Do not go to C100, because we want to ignore this latest
%% proposal. Write ours instead via C300.
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
LatestUnanimousP ->
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
?REACT({b10, ?LINE,
[{latest_unanimous_p, LatestUnanimousP},
{latest_epoch,P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{latest_author,P_latest#projection_v1.author_server},
{newprop_epoch,P_newprop#projection_v1.epoch_number},
{newprop_author,P_newprop#projection_v1.author_server}
]}),
put(b10_hack, false),
react_to_env_C100(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
P_newprop_flap_count >= FlapLimit ->
%% I am flapping ... what else do I do?
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [i_am_flapping,
{newprop_flap_count, P_newprop_flap_count},
{flap_limit, FlapLimit}]}),
_B10Hack = get(b10_hack),
case proplists:get_value(private_write_verbose, S#ch_mgr.opts) of
true ->
io:format(user, "{FLAP: ~w flaps ~w}! ", [S#ch_mgr.name, P_newprop_flap_count]);
_ ->
ok
end,
if
%% MEANWHILE, we have learned some things about this
%% algorithm in the past few months. With the introduction
%% of the "inner projection" concept, we know that the inner
%% projection may be stable but the "outer" projection will
%% continue to be flappy for as long as there's an
%% asymmetric network partition somewhere. We now know that
%% that flappiness is OK and that the only problem with it
%% is that it needs to be slowed down so that we don't have
%% zillions of public projection proposals written every
%% second.
%%
%% It doesn't matter if the FlapLimit count mechanism
%% doesn't give an accurate sense of global flapping state.
%% FlapLimit is enough to be able to tell us to slow down.
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
true ->
%% We already know that I'm flapping. We need to
%% signal to the rest of the world that I'm writing
%% and flapping and churning, so we cannot always
%% go to A50 from here.
%%
%% If we do go to A50, then recommend that we poll less
%% frequently.
{X, S2} = gimme_random_uniform(100, S),
if X < 80 ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [flap_stop]}),
ThrottleTime = if P_newprop_flap_count < 500 -> 1;
P_newprop_flap_count < 1000 -> 5;
P_newprop_flap_count < 5000 -> 10;
true -> 30
end,
FinalProps = [{my_flap_limit, FlapLimit},
{throttle_seconds, ThrottleTime}],
react_to_env_A50(P_latest, FinalProps, S2);
true ->
%% It is our moral imperative to write so that
%% the flap cycle continues enough times so that
%% everyone notices then eventually falls into
%% consensus.
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [flap_continue]}),
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S2)
end
end;
Retries > 2 ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [{retries, Retries}]}),
put(b10_hack, false),
%% The author of P_latest is too slow or crashed.
%% Let's try to write P_newprop and see what happens!
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
Rank_latest >= Rank_newprop
andalso
P_latest#projection_v1.author_server /= MyName ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE,
[{rank_latest, Rank_latest},
{rank_newprop, Rank_newprop},
{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server}]}),
put(b10_hack, false),
%% TODO: Is a UnanimousLatestInnerNotRelevant_p test needed in this clause???
%% Give the author of P_latest an opportunity to write a
%% new projection in a new epoch to resolve this mixed
%% opinion.
react_to_env_C200(Retries, P_latest, S);
true ->
?REACT({b10, ?LINE}),
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [{retries,Retries},{rank_latest, Rank_latest}, {rank_newprop, Rank_newprop}, {latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server}]}), % TODO debug delete me!
put(b10_hack, false),
%% P_newprop is best, so let's write it.
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S)
end.
react_to_env_C100(P_newprop, P_latest,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj=P_current}=S) ->
?REACT(c100),
Sane = projection_transition_is_sane(P_current, P_latest, MyName),
case Sane of
_ when P_current#projection_v1.epoch_number == 0 ->
%% Epoch == 0 is reserved for first-time, just booting conditions.
?REACT({c100, ?LINE, [first_write]}),
erase(perhaps_reset_loop),
react_to_env_C110(P_latest, S);
true ->
?REACT({c100, ?LINE, [sane]}),
erase(perhaps_reset_loop),
react_to_env_C110(P_latest, S);
{expected_author2,_ExpectedAuthor2}=_ExpectedErr ->
case get(perhaps_reset_loop) of
undefined ->
put(perhaps_reset_loop, 1),
?REACT({c100, ?LINE, [not_sane, get(why2), _ExpectedErr]}),
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
X when X > 15 ->
%% Ha, yes, this is possible. For example:
%% outer: author=e,upi=[b,a,d],repair=[c,e]
%% inner: author=e,upi=[b,e], repair=[]
%% In this case, the transition from inner to outer by A30
%% has chosen the wrong author. We have two choices.
%% 1. Accept this transition, because it really was the
%% safe & transition-approved UPI+repeairing that we
%% were using while we were flapping. I'm 99% certain
%% that this is safe. TODO: Verify
%% 2. I'm not yet 100% certain that #1 is safe, so instead
%% we fall back to the one thing that we know is safe:
%% the 'none' projection, which lets the chain rebuild
%% itself normally during future iterations.
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch_latest,
all_members=All_list,
members_dict=MembersDict} = P_latest,
P_none0 = make_none_projection(MyName, All_list, MembersDict),
P_none1 = P_none0#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch_latest},
Dbg = [{none_projection,true}],
P_none = machi_projection:update_checksum(
P_none1#projection_v1{dbg=Dbg}),
io:format(user, "YO: looping transition forced to none!\nNewProp: ~w\nLatest: ~w\nNone: ~w\n", [machi_projection:make_summary(P_newprop), machi_projection:make_summary(P_latest), machi_projection:make_summary(P_none)]),
%% Recurse to self!
react_to_env_C100(P_none, P_none, S);
X ->
put(perhaps_reset_loop, X+1),
?REACT({c100, ?LINE, [not_sane, get(why2), _ExpectedErr]}),
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S)
end;
_AnyOtherReturnValue ->
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% P_latest is not sane.
%% By process of elimination, P_newprop is best,
%% so let's write it.
?REACT({c100, ?LINE, [not_sane, get(why2), _AnyOtherReturnValue]}),
erase(perhaps_reset_loop),
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S)
end.
react_to_env_C110(P_latest, #ch_mgr{name=MyName} = S) ->
?REACT(c110),
Extra_todo = [{react,get(react)}],
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
P_latest2 = machi_projection:update_dbg2(P_latest, Extra_todo),
MyNamePid = proxy_pid(MyName, S),
%% This is the local projection store. Use a larger timeout, so
%% that things locally are pretty horrible if we're killed by a
%% timeout exception.
%% ok = ?FLU_PC:write_projection(MyNamePid, private, P_latest2, ?TO*30),
Goo = P_latest2#projection_v1.epoch_number,
%% io:format(user, "HEE110 ~w ~w ~w\n", [S#ch_mgr.name, self(), lists:reverse(get(react))]),
{ok,Goo} = {?FLU_PC:write_projection(MyNamePid, private, P_latest2, ?TO*30),Goo},
case proplists:get_value(private_write_verbose, S#ch_mgr.opts) of
true ->
{_,_,C} = os:timestamp(),
MSec = trunc(C / 1000),
{HH,MM,SS} = time(),
P_latest2x = P_latest2#projection_v1{dbg2=[]}, % limit verbose len.
case inner_projection_exists(P_latest2) of
false ->
case proplists:get_value(private_write_verbose, S#ch_mgr.opts) of
true ->
io:format(user, "\n~2..0w:~2..0w:~2..0w.~3..0w ~p uses plain: ~w\n",
[HH,MM,SS,MSec, S#ch_mgr.name,
machi_projection:make_summary(P_latest2x)]);
_ ->
ok
end;
true ->
case proplists:get_value(private_write_verbose, S#ch_mgr.opts) of
true ->
P_inner = inner_projection_or_self(P_latest2),
P_innerx = P_inner#projection_v1{dbg2=[]}, % limit verbose len.
io:format(user, "\n~2..0w:~2..0w:~2..0w.~3..0w ~p uses inner: ~w\n",
[HH,MM,SS,MSec, S#ch_mgr.name,
machi_projection:make_summary(P_innerx)]);
_ ->
ok
end
end;
_ ->
ok
end,
react_to_env_C120(P_latest, [], S).
react_to_env_C120(P_latest, FinalProps, #ch_mgr{proj_history=H} = S) ->
?REACT(c120),
H2 = queue:in(P_latest, H),
H3 = case queue:len(H2) of
%% TODO: revisit this constant? Is this too long as a base?
%% My hunch is that it's fine and that the flap_limit needs to
%% be raised much higher (because it can increase several ticks
%% without a newer public epoch proposed anywhere).
X when X > length(P_latest#projection_v1.all_members) * 2 ->
{_V, Hxx} = queue:out(H2),
Hxx;
_ ->
H2
end,
%% HH = [if is_atom(X) -> X; is_tuple(X) -> {element(1,X), element(2,X)} end || X <- get(react), is_atom(X) orelse size(X) == 3],
%% io:format(user, "HEE120 ~w ~w ~w\n", [S#ch_mgr.name, self(), lists:reverse(HH)]),
?REACT({c120, [{latest, machi_projection:make_summary(P_latest)}]}),
{{now_using, FinalProps, P_latest#projection_v1.epoch_number},
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
S#ch_mgr{proj=P_latest, proj_history=H3}}.
react_to_env_C200(Retries, P_latest, S) ->
?REACT(c200),
try
%% TODO: This code works "well enough" without actually
%% telling anybody anything. Do we want to rip this out?
%% Actually implement it? None of the above?
yo:tell_author_yo(P_latest#projection_v1.author_server)
catch _Type:_Err ->
%% io:format(user, "TODO: tell_author_yo is broken: ~p ~p\n",
%% [_Type, _Err]),
ok
end,
react_to_env_C210(Retries, S).
react_to_env_C210(Retries, #ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj=Proj} = S) ->
?REACT(c210),
sleep_ranked_order(10, 100, MyName, Proj#projection_v1.all_members),
react_to_env_C220(Retries, S).
react_to_env_C220(Retries, S) ->
?REACT(c220),
react_to_env_A20(Retries + 1, S).
react_to_env_C300(#projection_v1{epoch_number=_Epoch_newprop}=P_newprop,
#projection_v1{epoch_number=_Epoch_latest}=_P_latest, S) ->
?REACT(c300),
%% This logic moved to A30.
%% NewEpoch = erlang:max(Epoch_newprop, Epoch_latest) + 1,
%% P_newprop2 = P_newprop#projection_v1{epoch_number=NewEpoch},
%% react_to_env_C310(update_checksum(P_newprop2), S).
react_to_env_C310(machi_projection:update_checksum(P_newprop), S).
react_to_env_C310(P_newprop, S) ->
?REACT(c310),
Epoch = P_newprop#projection_v1.epoch_number,
{WriteRes, S2} = cl_write_public_proj_skip_local_error(Epoch, P_newprop, S),
?REACT({c310, ?LINE,
[{newprop, machi_projection:make_summary(P_newprop)},
{write_result, WriteRes}]}),
react_to_env_A10(S2).
calculate_flaps(P_newprop, _P_current, _FlapLimit,
#ch_mgr{name=MyName, proj_history=H, flap_start=FlapStart,
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
flaps=Flaps, runenv=RunEnv1} = S) ->
HistoryPs = queue:to_list(H),
Ps = HistoryPs ++ [P_newprop],
UniqueProposalSummaries = lists:usort([{P#projection_v1.upi,
P#projection_v1.repairing,
P#projection_v1.down} || P <- Ps]),
{_WhateverUnanimous, BestP, Props, _S} =
cl_read_latest_projection(private, S),
2015-04-30 14:16:08 +00:00
NotBestPs = proplists:get_value(not_unanimous_answers, Props, []),
DownUnion = lists:usort(
lists:flatten(
[P#projection_v1.down ||
P <- [BestP|NotBestPs]])),
HosedTransUnion = proplists:get_value(trans_all_hosed, Props),
TransFlapCounts0 = proplists:get_value(trans_all_flap_counts, Props),
%% NOTE: bad_answer_flus are probably due to timeout or some other network
%% glitch, i.e., anything other than {ok, P::projection()}
%% response from machi_flu0:proj_read_latest().
BadFLUs = proplists:get_value(bad_answer_flus, Props),
RemoteTransFlapCounts1 = lists:keydelete(MyName, 1, TransFlapCounts0),
RemoteTransFlapCounts =
[X || {_FLU, {{_FlEpk,FlTime}, _FlapCount}}=X <- RemoteTransFlapCounts1,
FlTime /= ?NOT_FLAPPING],
TempNewFlaps = Flaps + 1,
TempAllFlapCounts = lists:sort([{MyName, {FlapStart, TempNewFlaps}}|
RemoteTransFlapCounts]),
%% Sanity check.
true = lists:all(fun({_,{_,_}}) -> true;
(_) -> false end, TempAllFlapCounts),
%% H is the bounded history of all of this manager's private
%% projection store writes. If we've proposed the *same*
%% {UPI+Repairing, Down} combination for the entire length of our
%% bounded size of H, then we're flapping.
%%
%% If we're flapping, then we use our own flap counter and that of
%% all of our peer managers to see if we've all got flap counters
%% that exceed the flap_limit. If that global condition appears
%% true, then we "blow the circuit breaker" by stopping our
%% participation in the flapping store (via the shortcut to A50).
%%
%% We reset our flap counter on any of several conditions:
%%
%% 1. If our bounded history H contains more than one proposal,
%% then by definition we are not flapping.
%% 2. If a remote manager is flapping and has re-started a new
%% flapping episode.
%% 3. If one of the remote managers that we saw earlier has
%% stopped flapping.
?REACT({calculate_flaps, queue:len(H), UniqueProposalSummaries}),
case {queue:len(H), UniqueProposalSummaries} of
{N, [_]} when N >= length(P_newprop#projection_v1.all_members) ->
NewFlaps = TempNewFlaps,
if element(2,FlapStart) == ?NOT_FLAPPING ->
NewFlapStart = {{epk,P_newprop#projection_v1.epoch_number},now()};
true ->
NewFlapStart = FlapStart
end,
%% Wow, this behavior is almost spooky.
%%
%% For an example partition map [{c,a}], on the very first
%% time this 'if' clause is hit by FLU b, AllHosed=[a,c].
%% How the heck does B know that??
%%
%% If I use:
%% DownUnionQQQ = [{P#projection_v1.epoch_number, P#projection_v1.author_server, P#projection_v1.down} || P <- [BestP|NotBestPs]],
%% AllHosed = [x_1] ++ DownUnion ++ [x_2] ++ HosedTransUnion ++ [x_3] ++ BadFLUs ++ [{downunionqqq, DownUnionQQQ}];
%%
%% ... then b sees this when proposing epoch 451:
%%
%% {all_hosed,
%% [x_1,a,c,x_2,x_3,
%% {downunionqqq,
%% [{450,a,[c]},{449,b,[]},{448,c,[a]},{441,d,[]}]}]},
%%
%% So b's working on epoch 451 at the same time that d's latest
%% public projection is only epoch 441. But there's enough
2015-05-07 09:43:51 +00:00
%% lag so that b can "see" that a's bad=[c] (due to
%% {error,partition}!) and c's bad=[a]. So voila, b
%% magically knows about both problem FLUs. Weird/cool.
AllFlapCounts = TempAllFlapCounts,
AllHosed = lists:usort(DownUnion ++ HosedTransUnion ++ BadFLUs);
{_N, _} ->
NewFlaps = 0,
NewFlapStart = {{epk,-1},?NOT_FLAPPING},
AllFlapCounts = [],
AllHosed = []
end,
FlappingI = make_flapping_i(NewFlapStart, NewFlaps, AllHosed,
AllFlapCounts, BadFLUs),
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% NOTE: Just because we increment flaps here, there's no correlation
%% to successful public proj store writes! For example,
%% if we loop through states C2xx a few times, we would incr
%% flaps each time ... but the C2xx path doesn't write a new
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
%% proposal to everyone's public proj stores. Similarly,
%% if we go through to C300, we will *try* to write to all public
%% stores, but the C3xx path doesn't care if all of those write
%% attempts *fail*. Our flap count is a rough heuristic only, and
%% a large local flaps count gives no concrete guarantee that any
%% communication has been successful with any other part of the
%% cluster.
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
%% TODO: 2015-03-04: I'm growing increasingly suspicious of
%% the 'runenv' variable that's threaded through all this code.
%% It isn't doing what I'd originally intended. Fix it.
{machi_projection:update_checksum(P_newprop#projection_v1{
flap=FlappingI}),
S#ch_mgr{flaps=NewFlaps, flap_start=NewFlapStart, runenv=RunEnv1}}.
make_flapping_i() ->
make_flapping_i({{epk,-1},?NOT_FLAPPING}, 0, [], [], []).
make_flapping_i(NewFlapStart, NewFlaps, AllHosed, AllFlapCounts, BadFLUs) ->
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
#flap_i{flap_count={NewFlapStart, NewFlaps},
all_hosed=AllHosed,
all_flap_counts=lists:sort(AllFlapCounts),
bad=BadFLUs}.
projection_transitions_are_sane(Ps, RelativeToServer) ->
projection_transitions_are_sane(Ps, RelativeToServer, false).
-ifdef(TEST).
projection_transitions_are_sane_retrospective(Ps, RelativeToServer) ->
projection_transitions_are_sane(Ps, RelativeToServer, true).
-endif. % TEST
projection_transitions_are_sane([], _RelativeToServer, _RetrospectiveP) ->
true;
projection_transitions_are_sane([_], _RelativeToServer, _RetrospectiveP) ->
true;
projection_transitions_are_sane([P1, P2|T], RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP) ->
case projection_transition_is_sane(P1, P2, RelativeToServer,
RetrospectiveP) of
true ->
projection_transitions_are_sane([P2|T], RelativeToServer,
RetrospectiveP);
Else ->
Else
end.
-ifdef(TEST).
projection_transition_is_sane_retrospective(P1, P2, RelativeToServer) ->
projection_transition_is_sane(P1, P2, RelativeToServer, true).
-endif. % TEST
projection_transition_is_sane(P1, P2, RelativeToServer) ->
projection_transition_is_sane(P1, P2, RelativeToServer, false).
projection_transition_is_sane(P1, P2, RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP) ->
put(why2, []),
case projection_transition_is_sane_with_si_epoch(
P1, P2, RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP) of
true ->
HasInner1 = inner_projection_exists(P1),
HasInner2 = inner_projection_exists(P2),
if HasInner1 orelse HasInner2 ->
Inner1 = inner_projection_or_self(P1),
Inner2 = inner_projection_or_self(P2),
if HasInner1 andalso HasInner2 ->
%% In case of inner->inner transition, we must allow
%% the epoch number to remain constant. Thus, we
%% call the function that does not check for a
%% strictly-increasing epoch.
?RETURN2(
projection_transition_is_sane_final_review(P1, P2,
projection_transition_is_sane_except_si_epoch(
Inner1, Inner2, RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP)));
true ->
?RETURN2(
projection_transition_is_sane_final_review(P1, P2,
projection_transition_is_sane_with_si_epoch(
Inner1, Inner2, RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP)))
end;
true ->
?RETURN2(true)
end;
Else ->
?RETURN2(Else)
end.
projection_transition_is_sane_final_review(_P1, P2,
{expected_author2,UPI1_tail}=Else) ->
%% Reminder: P1 & P2 are outer projections
%%
%% We have a small problem for state transition sanity checking in the
%% case where we are flapping *and* a repair has finished. One of the
%% sanity checks in simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane(() is that
%% the author of P2 in this case must be the tail of P1's UPI: i.e.,
%% it's the tail's responsibility to perform repair, therefore the tail
%% must damn well be the author of any transition that says a repair
%% finished successfully.
%%
%% The problem is that author_server of the inner projection does not
%% reflect the actual author! See the comment with the text
%% "The inner projection will have a fake author" in react_to_env_A30().
%%
%% So, there's a special return value that tells us to try to check for
%% the correct authorship here.
if UPI1_tail == P2#projection_v1.author_server ->
?RETURN2(true);
true ->
?RETURN2(Else)
end;
projection_transition_is_sane_final_review(_P1, _P2, Else) ->
?RETURN2(Else).
projection_transition_is_sane_with_si_epoch(
2015-07-04 05:57:38 +00:00
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch1} = P1,
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch2} = P2,
RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP) ->
case projection_transition_is_sane_except_si_epoch(
2015-07-04 05:57:38 +00:00
P1, P2, RelativeToServer, RetrospectiveP) of
true ->
%% Must be a strictly increasing epoch.
?RETURN2(Epoch2 > Epoch1);
2015-07-04 05:57:38 +00:00
Else ->
?RETURN2(Else)
2015-07-04 05:57:38 +00:00
end.
projection_transition_is_sane_except_si_epoch(
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch1,
epoch_csum=CSum1,
creation_time=CreationTime1,
author_server=AuthorServer1,
all_members=All_list1,
down=Down_list1,
upi=UPI_list1,
repairing=Repairing_list1,
dbg=Dbg1} = P1,
#projection_v1{epoch_number=Epoch2,
epoch_csum=CSum2,
creation_time=CreationTime2,
author_server=AuthorServer2,
all_members=All_list2,
down=Down_list2,
upi=UPI_list2,
repairing=Repairing_list2,
dbg=Dbg2} = P2,
2015-07-03 15:13:13 +00:00
RelativeToServer, __TODO_RetrospectiveP) ->
?RETURN2(undefined),
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
try
%% General notes:
%%
%% I'm making no attempt to be "efficient" here. All of these data
%% structures are small, and the funcs aren't called zillions of times per
%% second.
true = is_integer(Epoch1) andalso is_integer(Epoch2),
true = is_binary(CSum1) andalso is_binary(CSum2),
{_,_,_} = CreationTime1,
{_,_,_} = CreationTime2,
true = is_atom(AuthorServer1) andalso is_atom(AuthorServer2), % todo type may change?
true = is_list(All_list1) andalso is_list(All_list2),
true = is_list(Down_list1) andalso is_list(Down_list2),
true = is_list(UPI_list1) andalso is_list(UPI_list2),
true = is_list(Repairing_list1) andalso is_list(Repairing_list2),
true = is_list(Dbg1) andalso is_list(Dbg2),
%% Don't check for strictly increasing epoch here: that's the job of
%% projection_transition_is_sane_with_si_epoch().
true = Epoch2 >= Epoch1,
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% No duplicates
true = lists:sort(Down_list2) == lists:usort(Down_list2),
true = lists:sort(UPI_list2) == lists:usort(UPI_list2),
true = lists:sort(Repairing_list2) == lists:usort(Repairing_list2),
%% Disjoint-ness
All_list1 = All_list2, % todo will probably change
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
true = lists:sort(All_list2) == lists:sort(Down_list2 ++ UPI_list2 ++
Repairing_list2),
[] = [X || X <- Down_list2, not lists:member(X, All_list2)],
[] = [X || X <- UPI_list2, not lists:member(X, All_list2)],
[] = [X || X <- Repairing_list2, not lists:member(X, All_list2)],
DownS2 = sets:from_list(Down_list2),
UPIS2 = sets:from_list(UPI_list2),
RepairingS2 = sets:from_list(Repairing_list2),
true = sets:is_disjoint(DownS2, UPIS2),
true = sets:is_disjoint(DownS2, RepairingS2),
true = sets:is_disjoint(UPIS2, RepairingS2),
%% Hooray, all basic properties of the projection's elements are
%% not obviously bad. Now let's check if the UPI+Repairing->UPI
%% transition is good.
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
?RETURN2(
chain_state_transition_is_sane(AuthorServer1, UPI_list1, Repairing_list1,
AuthorServer2, UPI_list2))
catch
_Type:_Err ->
?RETURN2(oops),
S1 = machi_projection:make_summary(P1),
S2 = machi_projection:make_summary(P2),
Trace = erlang:get_stacktrace(),
{err, _Type, _Err, from, S1, to, S2, relative_to, RelativeToServer,
history, (catch lists:sort([no_history])),
stack, Trace}
end.
sleep_ranked_order(MinSleep, MaxSleep, FLU, FLU_list) ->
USec = calc_sleep_ranked_order(MinSleep, MaxSleep, FLU, FLU_list),
timer:sleep(USec),
USec.
calc_sleep_ranked_order(MinSleep, MaxSleep, FLU, FLU_list) ->
Front = lists:takewhile(fun(X) -> X /= FLU end,
lists:reverse(lists:sort(FLU_list))),
Index = length(Front),
NumNodes = length(FLU_list),
SleepChunk = if NumNodes == 0 -> 0;
true -> (MaxSleep - MinSleep) div NumNodes
end,
MinSleep + (SleepChunk * Index).
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
get_raw_flapping_i(#projection_v1{flap=F}) ->
F.
get_flap_count(P) ->
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
case get_raw_flapping_i(P) of undefined -> {0, 0};
F -> F#flap_i.flap_count
end.
get_all_flap_counts(P) ->
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
case get_raw_flapping_i(P) of undefined -> [];
F -> F#flap_i.all_flap_counts
end.
get_all_hosed(P) when is_record(P, projection_v1)->
2015-06-02 11:32:52 +00:00
case get_raw_flapping_i(P) of undefined -> [];
F -> F#flap_i.all_hosed
end.
merge_flap_counts(FlapCounts) ->
merge_flap_counts(FlapCounts, orddict:new()).
merge_flap_counts([], D) ->
orddict:to_list(D);
merge_flap_counts([FlapCount|Rest], D1) ->
%% We know that FlapCount is list({Actor, {{_epk,FlapStartTime},NumFlaps}}).
D2 = orddict:from_list(FlapCount),
2015-04-14 07:17:49 +00:00
D2 = orddict:from_list(FlapCount),
%% If the FlapStartTimes are identical, then pick the bigger flap count.
%% If the FlapStartTimes differ, then pick the larger start time tuple.
D3 = orddict:merge(fun(_Key, {{_,T1}, NF1}= V1, {{_,T2}, NF2}=V2)
when T1 == T2 ->
if NF1 > NF2 ->
V1;
true ->
V2
end;
(_Key, {{_,T1},_NF1}= V1, {{_,T2},_NF2}=V2) ->
if T1 > T2 ->
V1;
true ->
V2
end;
(_Key, V1, V2) ->
exit({bad_merge_2tuples,mod,?MODULE,line,?LINE,
_Key, V1, V2})
end, D1, D2),
merge_flap_counts(Rest, D3).
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
proxy_pid(Name, #ch_mgr{proxies_dict=ProxiesDict}) ->
orddict:fetch(Name, ProxiesDict).
gimme_random_uniform(N, S) ->
RunEnv1 = S#ch_mgr.runenv,
Seed1 = proplists:get_value(seed, RunEnv1),
{X, Seed2} = random:uniform_s(N, Seed1),
RunEnv2 = [{seed, Seed2}|lists:keydelete(seed, 1, RunEnv1)],
{X, S#ch_mgr{runenv=RunEnv2}}.
2015-06-02 11:55:18 +00:00
inner_projection_exists(#projection_v1{inner=undefined}) ->
false;
inner_projection_exists(#projection_v1{inner=_}) ->
true.
inner_projection_or_self(P) ->
2015-06-02 11:55:18 +00:00
case inner_projection_exists(P) of
false ->
P;
2015-06-02 11:55:18 +00:00
true ->
P#projection_v1.inner
end.
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
make_chmgr_regname(A) when is_atom(A) ->
list_to_atom(atom_to_list(A) ++ "_chmgr");
2015-05-02 07:59:28 +00:00
make_chmgr_regname(B) when is_binary(B) ->
list_to_atom(binary_to_list(B) ++ "_chmgr").
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
perhaps_start_repair(
#ch_mgr{name=MyName,
repair_worker=undefined,
proj=#projection_v1{creation_time=Start,
upi=[_|_]=UPI,
repairing=[_|_]}}=S) ->
RepairId = {MyName, os:timestamp()},
2015-05-12 13:42:03 +00:00
RepairOpts = [{repair_mode, repair}, verbose, {repair_id, RepairId}],
%% RepairOpts = [{repair_mode, check}, verbose],
RepairFun = fun() -> do_repair(S, RepairOpts, ap_mode) end,
LastUPI = lists:last(UPI),
IgnoreStabilityTime_p = proplists:get_value(ignore_stability_time,
S#ch_mgr.opts, false),
case timer:now_diff(os:timestamp(), Start) div 1000000 of
N when MyName == LastUPI andalso
(IgnoreStabilityTime_p orelse
N >= ?REPAIR_START_STABILITY_TIME) ->
2015-05-12 03:56:41 +00:00
{WorkerPid, _Ref} = spawn_monitor(RepairFun),
S#ch_mgr{repair_worker=WorkerPid,
repair_start=os:timestamp(),
repair_final_status=undefined};
_ ->
S
end;
perhaps_start_repair(S) ->
S.
do_repair(
#ch_mgr{name=MyName,
proj=#projection_v1{upi=UPI,
repairing=[_|_]=Repairing,
members_dict=MembersDict}}=_S_copy,
Opts, ap_mode=RepairMode) ->
T1 = os:timestamp(),
RepairId = proplists:get_value(repair_id, Opts, id1),
error_logger:info_msg("Repair start: tail ~p of ~p -> ~p, ~p ID ~w\n",
[MyName, UPI, Repairing, RepairMode, RepairId]),
ETS = ets:new(repair_stats, [private, set]),
ETS_T_Keys = [t_in_files, t_in_chunks, t_in_bytes,
t_out_files, t_out_chunks, t_out_bytes,
t_bad_chunks, t_elapsed_seconds],
[ets:insert(ETS, {K, 0}) || K <- ETS_T_Keys],
Res = machi_chain_repair:repair(ap_mode, MyName, Repairing, UPI,
MembersDict, ETS, Opts),
T2 = os:timestamp(),
Elapsed = (timer:now_diff(T2, T1) div 1000) / 1000,
ets:insert(ETS, {t_elapsed_seconds, Elapsed}),
Summary = case Res of ok -> "success";
_ -> "FAILURE"
end,
Stats = [{K, ets:lookup_element(ETS, K, 2)} || K <- ETS_T_Keys],
error_logger:info_msg("Repair ~s: tail ~p of ~p finished ~p repair ID ~w: "
2015-07-01 06:37:53 +00:00
"~p\nStats ~p\n",
[Summary, MyName, UPI, RepairMode, RepairId,
Res, Stats]),
ets:delete(ETS),
exit({repair_final_status, Res}).
sanitize_repair_state(#ch_mgr{repair_final_status=Res,
proj=#projection_v1{upi=[_|_]}}=S)
when Res /= undefined ->
S#ch_mgr{repair_worker=undefined, repair_start=undefined,
repair_final_status=undefined};
sanitize_repair_state(S) ->
S.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
perhaps_call_t(S, Partitions, FLU, DoIt) ->
try
perhaps_call(S, Partitions, FLU, DoIt)
catch
exit:timeout ->
{error, partition};
exit:{timeout,_} ->
{error, partition}
end.
perhaps_call(#ch_mgr{name=MyName}=S, Partitions, FLU, DoIt) ->
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
ProxyPid = proxy_pid(FLU, S),
RemoteFLU_p = FLU /= MyName,
erase(bad_sock),
case RemoteFLU_p andalso lists:member({MyName, FLU}, Partitions) of
false ->
2015-04-09 05:44:58 +00:00
Res = DoIt(ProxyPid),
if Res == {error, partition} ->
remember_partition_hack(FLU);
true ->
ok
end,
case RemoteFLU_p andalso lists:member({FLU, MyName}, Partitions) of
false ->
Res;
_ ->
(catch put(react, [{timeout2,me,MyName,to,FLU,RemoteFLU_p,Partitions}|get(react)])),
exit(timeout)
end;
_ ->
(catch put(react, [{timeout1,me,MyName,to,FLU,RemoteFLU_p,Partitions}|get(react)])),
exit(timeout)
end.
init_remember_partition_hack() ->
put(remember_partition_hack, []).
remember_partition_hack(FLU) ->
put(remember_partition_hack, [FLU|get(remember_partition_hack)]).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% @doc A simple technique for checking chain state transition safety.
%%
%% Math tells us that any change state `UPI1' plus `Repair1' to state
%% `UPI2' is OK as long as `UPI2' is a concatenation of some
%% order-preserving combination from `UPI1' with some order-preserving
%% combination from `Repair1'.
%%
%% ```
%% Good_UPI2s = [ X ++ Y || X <- machi_util:ordered_combinations(UPI1),
%% Y <- machi_util:ordered_combinations(Repair1)]'''
%%
%% Rather than creating that list and then checking if `UPI2' is in
%% it, we try a `diff'-like technique to check for basic state
%% transition safety. See docs for {@link mk/3} for more detail.
%%
%% ```
%% 2> machi_chain_manager1:mk([a,b], [], [a]).
%% {[keep,del],[]} %% good transition
%% 3> machi_chain_manager1:mk([a,b], [], [b,a]).
%% {[del,keep],[]} %% bad transition: too few 'keep' for UPI2's length 2
%% 4> machi_chain_manager1:mk([a,b], [c,d,e], [a,d]).
%% {[keep,del],[2]} %% good transition
%% 5> machi_chain_manager1:mk([a,b], [c,d,e], [a,bogus]).
%% {[keep,del],[error]} %% bad transition: 'bogus' not in Repair1'''
simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2) ->
?RETURN2(simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane(undefined, UPI1, Repair1,
undefined, UPI2)).
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
2015-07-03 15:13:13 +00:00
simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane(_Author1, UPI1, Repair1, Author2, UPI2) ->
{KeepsDels, Orders} = mk(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2),
NumKeeps = length([x || keep <- KeepsDels]),
NumOrders = length(Orders),
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
Answer1 = false == lists:member(error, Orders)
andalso Orders == lists:sort(Orders)
andalso length(UPI2) == NumKeeps + NumOrders,
if not Answer1 ->
?RETURN2(Answer1);
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
true ->
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
if Orders == [] ->
%% No repairing have joined UPI2. Keep original answer.
?RETURN2(Answer1);
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
Author2 == undefined ->
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% At least one Repairing1 element is now in UPI2.
%% We need Author2 to make better decision. Go
%% with what we know, silly caller for not giving
%% us what we need.
?RETURN2(Answer1);
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
Author2 /= undefined ->
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% At least one Repairing1 element is now in UPI2.
%% We permit only the tail to author such a UPI2.
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
case catch(lists:last(UPI1)) of
UPI1_tail when UPI1_tail == Author2 ->
?RETURN2(true);
UPI1_tail ->
?RETURN2({expected_author2,UPI1_tail})
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
end
end
end.
chain_state_transition_is_sane(Author1, UPI1, Repair1, Author2, UPI2) ->
ToSelfOnly_p = if UPI2 == [Author2] -> true;
true -> false
end,
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
Disjoint_UPIs = ordsets:is_disjoint(ordsets:from_list(UPI1),
ordsets:from_list(UPI2)),
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% This if statement contains the only exceptions that we make to
%% the judgement of simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane().
if ToSelfOnly_p ->
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% The transition is to UPI2=[Author2].
%% For AP mode, this transition is always safe (though not
%% always optimal for highest availability).
?RETURN2(true);
2015-07-03 13:05:35 +00:00
Disjoint_UPIs ->
WIP: 1st part of moving old chain state transtion code to new Ha, famous last words, amirite? %% The chain sequence/order checks at the bottom of this function aren't %% as easy-to-read as they ought to be. However, I'm moderately confident %% that it isn't buggy. TODO: refactor them for clarity. So, now machi_chain_manager1:projection_transition_is_sane() is using newer, far less buggy code to make sanity decisions. TODO: Add support for Retrospective mode. TODO is it really needed? Examples of how the old code sucks and the new code sucks less. 138> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxxx..x.xxxxxx..x.x....x..xx........................................................Failed! After 69 tests. [a,b,c] {c,[a,b,c],[c,b],b,[b,a],[b,a,c]} Old_res ([335,192,166,160,153,139]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(3 times) [a,b,c] %% {Author1,UPI1, Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [a,b,c],[], a, [b,a],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: we've swapped order of a & b, which is bad. 139> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxx..x...xx..........xxx..x..............x......x............................................(x10)...(x1)........Failed! After 120 tests. [b,c,a] {c,[c,a],[c],a,[a,b],[b,a]} Old_res ([335,192,185,160,153,123]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xx.xxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx(4 times) [b,a,c] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {a, [c], [], c, [c,b],[]} Old_res ([338,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) false Old code is wrong: b wasn't repairing in the previous state. 150> eqc:quickcheck(eqc:testing_time(10, machi_chain_manager1_test:prop_compare_legacy_with_v2_chain_transition_check(whole))). xxxxxxxxxxx....x...xxxxx..xx.....x.......xxx..x.......xxx...................x................x......(x10).....(x1)........xFailed! After 130 tests. [c,a,b] {b,[c],[b,a,c],c,[c,a,b],[b]} Old_res ([335,214,185,160,153,147]): true New_res: false (why line [1936]) Shrinking xxxx.x.xxx.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx(4 times) [c,b,a] %% {Author1,UPI1,Repair1,Author2,UPI2, Repair2} %% {c, [c], [a,b], c, [c,b,a],[]} Old_res ([335,328,185,160,153,111]): true New_res: false (why line [1981,1679]) false Old code is wrong: a & b were repairing but UPI2 has a & b in the wrong order.
2015-07-03 15:01:54 +00:00
%% The transition from UPI1 -> UPI2 where the two are
%% disjoint/no FLUs in common.
%% For AP mode, this transition is always safe (though not
%% always optimal for highest availability).
?RETURN2(true);
true ->
?RETURN2(
simple_chain_state_transition_is_sane(Author1, UPI1, Repair1,
Author2, UPI2))
end.
%% @doc Create a 2-tuple that describes how `UPI1' + `Repair1' are
%% transformed into `UPI2' in a chain state change.
%%
%% The 1st part of the 2-tuple is a list of `keep' and `del' instructions,
%% relative to the items in UPI1 and whether they are present (`keep') or
%% absent (`del') in `UPI2'.
%%
%% The 2nd part of the 2-tuple is `list(non_neg_integer()|error)' that
%% describes the relative order of items in `Repair1' that appear in
%% `UPI2'. The `error' atom is used to denote items not present in
%% `Repair1'.
mk(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2) ->
mk(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2, []).
mk([X|UPI1], Repair1, [X|UPI2], Acc) ->
mk(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2, [keep|Acc]);
mk([X|UPI1], Repair1, UPI2, Acc) ->
mk(UPI1, Repair1, UPI2 -- [X], [del|Acc]);
mk([], [], [], Acc) ->
{lists:reverse(Acc), []};
mk([], Repair1, UPI2, Acc) ->
{lists:reverse(Acc), machi_util:mk_order(UPI2, Repair1)}.