core/state/snapshot: reuse memory data instead of hitting disk#22700
Closed
karalabe wants to merge 2 commits intoethereum:masterfrom
karalabe:lessreads
Closed
core/state/snapshot: reuse memory data instead of hitting disk#22700karalabe wants to merge 2 commits intoethereum:masterfrom karalabe:lessreads
karalabe wants to merge 2 commits intoethereum:masterfrom
karalabe:lessreads
Conversation
Member
Author
|
Closing as this is a potentially problematic solution. Placing non-existing stuff into the cache (trie generated from a stale snapshot) can have weird consequences if one of the non-existing trie nodes gets generated in a next block, never getting written to disk because it's in the clean cache. We could possibly very carefully handle this cornercase, but seems asking for trouble. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Alternative implementation for #22667, which in theory does the same thing reusing the read/clean cache, instead of introducing a new mechanism. Needs to be benchmarked / verified though.