Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

discovery/graph: move business logic out of CRUD layer #9522

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

ellemouton
Copy link
Collaborator

In our mission to make the graph CRUD layer be pure CRUD, we move some business logic
out of the layer into a higher one.

In this specific example, the FilterKnownChanIDs DB call would both filter known channel IDs but would
also use the passed in channel updates to decide if the given channel should be removed from the zombie
index.

This logic, however, really is a separate piece of business logic and so should not be at the CRUD layer.
Moving it up a layer will also allow us to plug in a different CRUD layer (such as a SQL store for gossip 1.75)
without needing to re-implement the same business logic in that CRUD layer.

This does, however, mean that these steps will take place over more than 1 DB transaction.

This is part of the #9494 and will help to move the graph cache out of the CRUD layer.

@ellemouton ellemouton added database Related to the database/storage of LND graph no-changelog labels Feb 18, 2025
@ellemouton ellemouton self-assigned this Feb 18, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 18, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)
  • llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Collaborator

@bhandras bhandras left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 🥇

@@ -1947,7 +1941,7 @@ func TestFilterKnownChanIDs(t *testing.T) {
{ShortChannelID: scid2},
{ShortChannelID: scid3},
}
filteredIDs, err := graph.FilterKnownChanIDs(preChanIDs, isZombieUpdate)
filteredIDs, _, err := graph.FilterKnownChanIDs(preChanIDs)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like our test coverage is decreased? why are we not testing it?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

im not sure it makes sense that the coverage decreased - anything that was tested, is still tested right?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@ellemouton ellemouton Feb 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

added a commit to cover more

In our mission to make the graph CRUD layer be pure CRUD, we move some
business logic out of the layer into a higher one.

In this specific example, the FilterKnownChanIDs DB call would both
filter known channel IDs but would also use the passed in channel
updates to decide if the given channel should be removed from the zombie
index.

This logic, however, really is a separate piece of business logic and so
should not be at the CRUD layer.  Moving it up a layer will also allow
us to plug in a different CRUD layer (such as a SQL store for gossip
1.75) without needing to re-implement the same business logic in that
CRUD layer.
// more recent. During the querying of the gossip msg
// verification happens as usual. However we should start
// punishing peers when they don't provide us honest data ?
isStillZombie := isZombieChan(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One thing I don't see here is an update in unit tests to target this shift. Before this change, from the PoV of the method (assuming it has no intimate knowledge about the referenced interface), the logic didn't affect any DB records, but it does now.

I understand the motive to move some of the logic out from the channel graph, but perhaps an intermediate step would be to extract those methods related to gossip queries into a new struct/interface, which would accomplish the same goal, but via a layer of indirection.

Otherwise, you've eliminated responsibilities from one area, only to add some entirely new responsibilities in another area.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes good point.

The next set of PRs is going to separate out the graph cache from the ChannelGraph (ie, a new layer of abstraction there). So i think it will actually just be better to move this logic to that layer 👍

@ellemouton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Putting this on ice for now - I think with the next set of PRs that add a layer of indirection between the cache calls and the CRUD code, we can actually move this logic to that new layer instead.

@ellemouton ellemouton marked this pull request as draft February 18, 2025 18:43
@ellemouton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

replaced by #9529

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
database Related to the database/storage of LND graph no-changelog
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants