Compare commits
1 commit
master
...
slf/cp-mod
Author | SHA1 | Date | |
---|---|---|---|
|
bedd8fb37d |
1 changed files with 59 additions and 23 deletions
|
@ -106,6 +106,10 @@
|
|||
%% Maximum length of the history of adopted projections (via C120).
|
||||
-define(MAX_HISTORY_LENGTH, 30).
|
||||
|
||||
%% Number of retries in the react_to_env loop that we'll wait for a better
|
||||
%% author to write a unanimous projection.
|
||||
-define(RETRIES_FOR_BETTER_AUTHOR, 3).
|
||||
|
||||
%% API
|
||||
-export([start_link/2, start_link/3, stop/1, ping/1,
|
||||
set_chain_members/2, set_chain_members/3, set_active/2,
|
||||
|
@ -1488,13 +1492,28 @@ react_to_env_A40(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
|
|||
Rank_newprop, Rank_latest, S);
|
||||
|
||||
%% A40a (see flowchart)
|
||||
Rank_newprop > Rank_latest ->
|
||||
(Rank_newprop > Rank_latest) % clause1
|
||||
orelse
|
||||
(Rank_newprop > 0 % clause2 (multi-condition, keep reading!)
|
||||
andalso
|
||||
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,
|
||||
[{rank_latest, Rank_latest},
|
||||
[%% clause1 info
|
||||
{rank_latest, Rank_latest},
|
||||
{rank_newprop, Rank_newprop},
|
||||
{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server}]}),
|
||||
{latest_author, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server},
|
||||
%% clause2 info
|
||||
{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}]}),
|
||||
|
||||
%% TODO: There may be an "improvement" here. If we're the
|
||||
%% TODO: There may be an "improvement" for clause 1? 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
|
||||
|
@ -1502,24 +1521,39 @@ react_to_env_A40(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP,
|
|||
%% 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);
|
||||
%%
|
||||
%% clause2: A40b (see flowchart)
|
||||
|
||||
%% A40b (see flowchart)
|
||||
Rank_newprop > 0
|
||||
andalso
|
||||
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);
|
||||
%% "Optimization" to avoid too many cooks in the kitchen ... not
|
||||
%% necessary for correctness. Just trying to reduce churn a bit.
|
||||
%%
|
||||
%% If we're here, we believe that P_newprop is perhap better than
|
||||
%% P_latest. But let's not be too hasty. If I believe that I am
|
||||
%% the tail of the current proj, then consider my opinion to be
|
||||
%% better and therefore I'll go to C300 right away; all others
|
||||
%% ought to wait a while via C200. But we won't defer C300
|
||||
%% forever: that's why we check Retries.
|
||||
P_current_upi = P_current#projection_v1.upi,
|
||||
case (P_current_upi == []
|
||||
orelse
|
||||
lists:last(P_current_upi) == MyName)
|
||||
orelse
|
||||
(Retries > ?RETRIES_FOR_BETTER_AUTHOR) of
|
||||
true ->
|
||||
?REACT({a40,?LINE, []}),
|
||||
react_to_env_C300(P_newprop, P_latest, S);
|
||||
false ->
|
||||
?REACT({a40,?LINE, []}),
|
||||
%% Let's use the "kick" side-effect of C200 to encourage
|
||||
%% P_current's tail to take action.
|
||||
P_kick = if P_current_upi == [] ->
|
||||
P_latest; % shug, just pick this one
|
||||
true ->
|
||||
Auth = lists:last(P_current_upi),
|
||||
P_latest#projection_v1{author_server=Auth}
|
||||
end,
|
||||
react_to_env_C200(Retries, P_kick, S)
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
||||
%% A40c (see flowchart)
|
||||
LatestAuthorDownP ->
|
||||
|
@ -1686,7 +1720,7 @@ react_to_env_B10(Retries, P_newprop, P_latest, LatestUnanimousP, P_current_calc,
|
|||
|
||||
react_to_env_C100(P_newprop, P_latest, P_current_calc, S);
|
||||
|
||||
Retries > 2 ->
|
||||
Retries > ?RETRIES_FOR_BETTER_AUTHOR ->
|
||||
?REACT({b10, ?LINE, [{retries, Retries}]}),
|
||||
|
||||
%% The author of P_latest is too slow or crashed.
|
||||
|
@ -2005,6 +2039,8 @@ react_to_env_C200(Retries, P_latest, S) ->
|
|||
?REACT(c200),
|
||||
try
|
||||
AuthorProxyPid = proxy_pid(P_latest#projection_v1.author_server, S),
|
||||
?REACT({c200, ?LINE,
|
||||
[{kick_server, P_latest#projection_v1.author_server}]}),
|
||||
?FLU_PC:kick_projection_reaction(AuthorProxyPid, [])
|
||||
catch _Type:_Err ->
|
||||
%% ?V("TODO: tell_author_yo is broken: ~p ~p\n",
|
||||
|
@ -2015,7 +2051,7 @@ react_to_env_C200(Retries, P_latest, 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),
|
||||
sleep_ranked_order(250, 500, MyName, Proj#projection_v1.all_members),
|
||||
react_to_env_C220(Retries, S).
|
||||
|
||||
react_to_env_C220(Retries, S) ->
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue