dash/test/functional/feature_pruning.py

504 lines
24 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

#!/usr/bin/env python3
# Copyright (c) 2014-2020 The Bitcoin Core developers
# Distributed under the MIT software license, see the accompanying
# file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.
Backports 0.15 pr2 (#2597) * Merge #9815: Trivial: use EXIT_ codes instead of magic numbers a87d02a use EXIT_ codes instead of magic numbers (Marko Bencun) * Merge #9801: Removed redundant parameter from mempool.PrioritiseTransaction eaea2bb Removed redundant parameter from mempool.PrioritiseTransaction (gubatron) * remove extra parameter (see 3a3745bb) in dash specific code * Merge #9819: Remove harmless read of unusued priority estimates bc8fd12 Remove harmless read of unusued priority estimates (Alex Morcos) * Merge #9766: Add --exclude option to rpc-tests.py c578408 Add exclude option to rpc-tests.py (John Newbery) * Merge #9577: Fix docstrings in qa tests 3f95a80 Fix docstrings in qa tests (John Newbery) * Merge #9823: qa: Set correct path for binaries in rpc tests 3333ad0 qa: Set correct path for binaries in rpc tests (MarcoFalke) * Merge #9833: Trivial: fix comments referencing AppInit2 ef9f495 Trivial: fix comments referencing AppInit2 (Marko Bencun) * Merge #9612: [trivial] Rephrase the definition of difficulty. dc222f8 Trivial: Rephrase the definition of difficulty in the code. (Karl-Johan Alm) * Merge #9847: Extra test vector for BIP32 30aedcb BIP32 extra test vector (Pieter Wuille) * Merge #9839: [qa] Make import-rescan.py watchonly check reliable 864890a [qa] Make import-rescan.py watchonly check reliable (Russell Yanofsky) Tree-SHA512: ea0e2b1d4fc8f35174c3d575fb751b428daf6ad3aa944fad4e3ddcc9195e4f17051473acabc54203b1d27cca64cf911b737ab92e986c40ef384410652e2dbea1 * Change back file params
2019-01-07 10:55:35 +01:00
"""Test the pruning code.
Backports 0.15 pr2 (#2597) * Merge #9815: Trivial: use EXIT_ codes instead of magic numbers a87d02a use EXIT_ codes instead of magic numbers (Marko Bencun) * Merge #9801: Removed redundant parameter from mempool.PrioritiseTransaction eaea2bb Removed redundant parameter from mempool.PrioritiseTransaction (gubatron) * remove extra parameter (see 3a3745bb) in dash specific code * Merge #9819: Remove harmless read of unusued priority estimates bc8fd12 Remove harmless read of unusued priority estimates (Alex Morcos) * Merge #9766: Add --exclude option to rpc-tests.py c578408 Add exclude option to rpc-tests.py (John Newbery) * Merge #9577: Fix docstrings in qa tests 3f95a80 Fix docstrings in qa tests (John Newbery) * Merge #9823: qa: Set correct path for binaries in rpc tests 3333ad0 qa: Set correct path for binaries in rpc tests (MarcoFalke) * Merge #9833: Trivial: fix comments referencing AppInit2 ef9f495 Trivial: fix comments referencing AppInit2 (Marko Bencun) * Merge #9612: [trivial] Rephrase the definition of difficulty. dc222f8 Trivial: Rephrase the definition of difficulty in the code. (Karl-Johan Alm) * Merge #9847: Extra test vector for BIP32 30aedcb BIP32 extra test vector (Pieter Wuille) * Merge #9839: [qa] Make import-rescan.py watchonly check reliable 864890a [qa] Make import-rescan.py watchonly check reliable (Russell Yanofsky) Tree-SHA512: ea0e2b1d4fc8f35174c3d575fb751b428daf6ad3aa944fad4e3ddcc9195e4f17051473acabc54203b1d27cca64cf911b737ab92e986c40ef384410652e2dbea1 * Change back file params
2019-01-07 10:55:35 +01:00
WARNING:
This test uses 4GB of disk space.
This test takes 30 mins or more (up to 2 hours)
"""
import os
from test_framework.blocktools import create_coinbase
from test_framework.governance import (
EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV,
EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV_PRUNE,
)
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22257: test: refactor: various (de)serialization helpers cleanups/improvements bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb test: doc: improve doc for `from_hex` helper (mention `to_hex` alternative) (Sebastian Falbesoner) 191405420815d49ab50184513717a303fc2744d6 scripted-diff: test: rename `FromHex` to `from_hex` (Sebastian Falbesoner) a79396fe5f8f81c78cf84117a87074c6ff6c9d95 test: remove `ToHex` helper, use .serialize().hex() instead (Sebastian Falbesoner) 2ce7b47958c4a10ba20dc86c011d71cda4b070a5 test: introduce `tx_from_hex` helper for tx deserialization (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: There are still many functional tests that perform conversions from a hex-string to a message object (deserialization) manually. This PR identifies all those instances and replaces them with a newly introduced helper `tx_from_hex`. Instances were found via * `git grep "deserialize.*BytesIO"` and some of them manually, when it were not one-liners. Further, the helper `ToHex` was removed and simply replaced by `.serialize().hex()`, since now both variants are in use (sometimes even within the same test) and using the helper doesn't really have an advantage in readability. (see discussion https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22257#discussion_r652404782) ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: review re-ACK bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb 😁 Tree-SHA512: e25d7dc85918de1d6755a5cea65471b07a743204c20ad1c2f71ff07ef48cc1b9ad3fe5f515c1efaba2b2e3d89384e7980380c5d81895f9826e2046808cd3266e
2021-06-24 12:47:04 +02:00
from test_framework.messages import CBlock
from test_framework.script import (
CScript,
OP_NOP,
OP_RETURN,
)
from test_framework.test_framework import BitcoinTestFramework
from test_framework.util import (
assert_equal,
assert_greater_than,
assert_raises_rpc_error,
)
# Rescans start at the earliest block up to 2 hours before a key timestamp, so
# the manual prune RPC avoids pruning blocks in the same window to be
# compatible with pruning based on key creation time.
TIMESTAMP_WINDOW = 2 * 60 * 60
def mine_large_blocks(node, n):
# Make a large scriptPubKey for the coinbase transaction. This is OP_RETURN
# followed by 950k of OP_NOP. This would be non-standard in a non-coinbase
# transaction but is consensus valid.
# Set the nTime if this is the first time this function has been called.
# A static variable ensures that time is monotonicly increasing and is therefore
# different for each block created => blockhash is unique.
if "nTimes" not in mine_large_blocks.__dict__:
mine_large_blocks.nTime = 0
# Get the block parameters for the first block
big_script = CScript([OP_RETURN] + [OP_NOP] * 950000)
best_block = node.getblock(node.getbestblockhash())
height = int(best_block["height"]) + 1
mine_large_blocks.nTime = max(mine_large_blocks.nTime, int(best_block["time"])) + 1
previousblockhash = int(best_block["hash"], 16)
for _ in range(n):
# Build the coinbase transaction (with large scriptPubKey)
coinbase_tx = create_coinbase(height)
coinbase_tx.vin[0].nSequence = 2 ** 32 - 1
coinbase_tx.vout[0].scriptPubKey = big_script
coinbase_tx.rehash()
# Build the block
block = CBlock()
block.nVersion = best_block["version"]
block.hashPrevBlock = previousblockhash
block.nTime = mine_large_blocks.nTime
block.nBits = int('207fffff', 16)
block.nNonce = 0
block.vtx = [coinbase_tx]
block.hashMerkleRoot = block.calc_merkle_root()
block.solve()
# Submit to the node
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22257: test: refactor: various (de)serialization helpers cleanups/improvements bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb test: doc: improve doc for `from_hex` helper (mention `to_hex` alternative) (Sebastian Falbesoner) 191405420815d49ab50184513717a303fc2744d6 scripted-diff: test: rename `FromHex` to `from_hex` (Sebastian Falbesoner) a79396fe5f8f81c78cf84117a87074c6ff6c9d95 test: remove `ToHex` helper, use .serialize().hex() instead (Sebastian Falbesoner) 2ce7b47958c4a10ba20dc86c011d71cda4b070a5 test: introduce `tx_from_hex` helper for tx deserialization (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: There are still many functional tests that perform conversions from a hex-string to a message object (deserialization) manually. This PR identifies all those instances and replaces them with a newly introduced helper `tx_from_hex`. Instances were found via * `git grep "deserialize.*BytesIO"` and some of them manually, when it were not one-liners. Further, the helper `ToHex` was removed and simply replaced by `.serialize().hex()`, since now both variants are in use (sometimes even within the same test) and using the helper doesn't really have an advantage in readability. (see discussion https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22257#discussion_r652404782) ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: review re-ACK bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb 😁 Tree-SHA512: e25d7dc85918de1d6755a5cea65471b07a743204c20ad1c2f71ff07ef48cc1b9ad3fe5f515c1efaba2b2e3d89384e7980380c5d81895f9826e2046808cd3266e
2021-06-24 12:47:04 +02:00
node.submitblock(block.serialize().hex())
previousblockhash = block.sha256
height += 1
mine_large_blocks.nTime += 1
def calc_usage(blockdir):
return sum(os.path.getsize(blockdir + f) for f in os.listdir(blockdir) if os.path.isfile(os.path.join(blockdir, f))) / (1024. * 1024.)
class PruneTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
def set_test_params(self):
self.setup_clean_chain = True
self.num_nodes = 6
self.supports_cli = False
# Create nodes 0 and 1 to mine.
# Create node 2 to test pruning.
self.full_node_default_args = ["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-maxreceivebuffer=20000", "-blockmaxsize=999000", "-checkblocks=5"]
# Create nodes 3 and 4 to test manual pruning (they will be re-started with manual pruning later)
# Create nodes 5 to test wallet in prune mode, but do not connect
self.extra_args = [
self.full_node_default_args,
self.full_node_default_args,
["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance","-txindex=0","-maxreceivebuffer=20000","-prune=550"],
["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance","-txindex=0","-maxreceivebuffer=20000","-blockmaxsize=999000"],
["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance","-txindex=0","-maxreceivebuffer=20000","-blockmaxsize=999000"],
["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance","-txindex=0","-prune=550"],
]
self.rpc_timeout = 120
def setup_network(self):
self.setup_nodes()
self.prunedir = os.path.join(self.nodes[2].datadir, self.chain, 'blocks', '')
self.connect_nodes(0, 1)
self.connect_nodes(1, 2)
self.connect_nodes(0, 2)
self.connect_nodes(0, 3)
self.connect_nodes(0, 4)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:5])
def setup_nodes(self):
self.add_nodes(self.num_nodes, self.extra_args)
self.start_nodes()
if self.is_wallet_compiled():
self.import_deterministic_coinbase_privkeys()
def create_big_chain(self):
# Start by creating some coinbases we can spend later
self.nodes[1].generate(200)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:2])
self.nodes[0].generate(150)
# Then mine enough full blocks to create more than 550MiB of data
mine_large_blocks(self.nodes[0], 645)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:5])
def test_invalid_command_line_options(self):
self.stop_node(0)
self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error(
expected_msg='Error: Prune cannot be configured with a negative value.',
extra_args=['-prune=-1', '-txindex=0', '-disablegovernance'],
)
self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error(
expected_msg='Error: Prune configured below the minimum of 550 MiB. Please use a higher number.',
extra_args=['-prune=549'],
)
self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error(
expected_msg='Error: Prune mode is incompatible with -txindex.',
extra_args=['-prune=550', '-txindex'],
)
self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error(
fix: use coinstatsindex instead blockfilterindex in feature_prunning That follow-up changes for backports bitcoin#15946 and bitcoin#19521 It fixes failure: TestFramework (INFO): Test invalid pruning command line options TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed Traceback (most recent call last): File "dashtest/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 511, in assert_start_raises_init_error ret = self.process.wait(timeout=self.rpc_timeout) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/usr/lib/python3.11/subprocess.py", line 1264, in wait return self._wait(timeout=timeout) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/usr/lib/python3.11/subprocess.py", line 2038, in _wait raise TimeoutExpired(self.args, timeout) subprocess.TimeoutExpired: Command '['dashsrc/dashd', '-datadir=/tmp/dash_func_test_m8w6q7a2/node0', '-logtimemicros', '-debug', '-debugexclude=libevent', '-debugexclude=leveldb', '-mocktime=1417713337', '-uacomment=testnode0', '-logthreadnames', '-logsourcelocations', '-createwalletbackups=0', '-prune=550', '-blockfilterindex', '-mocktime=1417713337']' timed out after 120 seconds During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: Traceback (most recent call last): File "dashtest/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 159, in main self.run_test() File "dashtest/functional/feature_pruning.py", line 495, in run_test self.test_invalid_command_line_options() File "dashtest/functional/feature_pruning.py", line 149, in test_invalid_command_line_options self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error( File "dashtest/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 541, in assert_start_raises_init_error self._raise_assertion_error(assert_msg) File "dashtest/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 180, in _raise_assertion_error raise AssertionError(self._node_msg(msg)) AssertionError: [node 0] dashd should have exited within 120s with expected error Error: Prune mode is incompatible with -blockfilterindex. TestFramework (INFO): Stopping nodes
2024-08-13 10:57:40 +02:00
expected_msg='Error: Prune mode is incompatible with -coinstatsindex.',
extra_args=['-prune=550', '-coinstatsindex'],
)
self.nodes[0].assert_start_raises_init_error(
expected_msg='Error: Prune mode is incompatible with -disablegovernance=false.',
extra_args=['-prune=550', '-disablegovernance=false'],
)
def test_height_min(self):
assert os.path.isfile(os.path.join(self.prunedir, "blk00000.dat")), "blk00000.dat is missing, pruning too early"
self.log.info("Success")
self.log.info("Though we're already using more than 550MiB, current usage: %d" % calc_usage(self.prunedir))
self.log.info("Mining 25 more blocks should cause the first block file to be pruned")
# Pruning doesn't run until we're allocating another chunk, 20 full blocks past the height cutoff will ensure this
mine_large_blocks(self.nodes[0], 25)
# Wait for blk00000.dat to be pruned
self.wait_until(lambda: not os.path.isfile(os.path.join(self.prunedir, "blk00000.dat")), timeout=30)
self.log.info("Success")
usage = calc_usage(self.prunedir)
self.log.info("Usage should be below target: %d" % usage)
assert_greater_than(550, usage)
def create_chain_with_staleblocks(self):
# Create stale blocks in manageable sized chunks
self.log.info("Mine 24 (stale) blocks on Node 1, followed by 25 (main chain) block reorg from Node 0, for 12 rounds")
Merge #19674: refactor: test: use throwaway _ variable for unused loop counters dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 refactor: test: use _ variable for unused loop counters (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: This tiny PR substitutes Python loops in the form of `for x in range(N): ...` by `for _ in range(N): ...` where applicable. The idea is indicating to the reader that a block (or statement, in list comprehensions) is just repeated N times, and that the loop counter is not used in the body, hence using the throwaway variable. This is already done quite often in the current tests (see e.g. `$ git grep "for _ in range("`). Another alternative would be using `itertools.repeat` (according to Python core developer Raymond Hettinger it's [even faster](https://twitter.com/raymondh/status/1144527183341375488)), but that doesn't seem to be widespread in use and I'm not sure about a readability increase. The only drawback I see is that whenever one wants to debug loop iterations, one would need to introduce a loop variable again. Reviewing this is basically a no-brainer, since tests would fail immediately if a a substitution has taken place on a loop where the variable is used. Instances to replace were found by `$ git grep "for.*in range("` and manually checked. ACKs for top commit: darosior: ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 instagibbs: manual inspection ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19674/commits/dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 practicalswift: ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 -- the updated code is easier to reason about since the throwaway nature of a variable is expressed explicitly (using the Pythonic `_` idiom) instead of implicitly. Explicit is better than implicit was we all know by now :) Tree-SHA512: 5f43ded9ce14e5e00b3876ec445b90acda1842f813149ae7bafa93f3ac3d510bb778e2c701187fd2c73585e6b87797bb2d2987139bd1a9ba7d58775a59392406
2020-08-11 02:50:34 +02:00
for _ in range(12):
# Disconnect node 0 so it can mine a longer reorg chain without knowing about node 1's soon-to-be-stale chain
# Node 2 stays connected, so it hears about the stale blocks and then reorg's when node0 reconnects
self.disconnect_nodes(0, 1)
self.disconnect_nodes(0, 2)
# Mine 24 blocks in node 1
mine_large_blocks(self.nodes[1], 24)
# Reorg back with 25 block chain from node 0
mine_large_blocks(self.nodes[0], 25)
# Create connections in the order so both nodes can see the reorg at the same time
self.connect_nodes(0, 1)
self.connect_nodes(0, 2)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:3])
self.log.info("Usage can be over target because of high stale rate: %d" % calc_usage(self.prunedir))
def reorg_test(self):
# Node 1 will mine a 300 block chain starting 287 blocks back from Node 0 and Node 2's tip
# This will cause Node 2 to do a reorg requiring 288 blocks of undo data to the reorg_test chain
height = self.nodes[1].getblockcount()
self.log.info("Current block height: %d" % height)
self.forkheight = height - 287
self.forkhash = self.nodes[1].getblockhash(self.forkheight)
self.log.info("Invalidating block %s at height %d" % (self.forkhash, self.forkheight))
self.nodes[1].invalidateblock(self.forkhash)
# We've now switched to our previously mined-24 block fork on node 1, but that's not what we want
# So invalidate that fork as well, until we're on the same chain as node 0/2 (but at an ancestor 288 blocks ago)
mainchainhash = self.nodes[0].getblockhash(self.forkheight - 1)
curhash = self.nodes[1].getblockhash(self.forkheight - 1)
while curhash != mainchainhash:
self.nodes[1].invalidateblock(curhash)
curhash = self.nodes[1].getblockhash(self.forkheight - 1)
assert self.nodes[1].getblockcount() == self.forkheight - 1
self.log.info("New best height: %d" % self.nodes[1].getblockcount())
# Mine one block to avoid automatic recovery from forks on restart
self.nodes[1].generate(1)
# Disconnect node1 and generate the new chain
self.disconnect_nodes(0, 1)
self.disconnect_nodes(1, 2)
self.log.info("Generating new longer chain of 300 more blocks")
self.nodes[1].generate(299)
self.log.info("Reconnect nodes")
self.connect_nodes(0, 1)
self.connect_nodes(1, 2)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:3], timeout=120)
self.log.info("Verify height on node 2: %d" % self.nodes[2].getblockcount())
self.log.info("Usage possibly still high because of stale blocks in block files: %d" % calc_usage(self.prunedir))
self.log.info("Mine 220 more large blocks so we have requisite history")
mine_large_blocks(self.nodes[0], 220)
self.sync_blocks(self.nodes[0:3], timeout=120)
usage = calc_usage(self.prunedir)
self.log.info("Usage should be below target: %d" % usage)
assert_greater_than(550, usage)
def reorg_back(self):
# Verify that a block on the old main chain fork has been pruned away
assert_raises_rpc_error(-1, "Block not available (pruned data)", self.nodes[2].getblock, self.forkhash)
with self.nodes[2].assert_debug_log(expected_msgs=['block verification stopping at height', '(pruning, no data)']):
self.nodes[2].verifychain(checklevel=4, nblocks=0)
self.log.info("Will need to redownload block %d" % self.forkheight)
# Verify that we have enough history to reorg back to the fork point
# Although this is more than 288 blocks, because this chain was written more recently
# and only its other 299 small and 220 large blocks are in the block files after it,
# it is expected to still be retained
self.nodes[2].getblock(self.nodes[2].getblockhash(self.forkheight))
first_reorg_height = self.nodes[2].getblockcount()
curchainhash = self.nodes[2].getblockhash(self.mainchainheight)
self.nodes[2].invalidateblock(curchainhash)
goalbestheight = self.mainchainheight
goalbesthash = self.mainchainhash2
# As of 0.10 the current block download logic is not able to reorg to the original chain created in
# create_chain_with_stale_blocks because it doesn't know of any peer that's on that chain from which to
# redownload its missing blocks.
# Invalidate the reorg_test chain in node 0 as well, it can successfully switch to the original chain
# because it has all the block data.
# However it must mine enough blocks to have a more work chain than the reorg_test chain in order
# to trigger node 2's block download logic.
# At this point node 2 is within 288 blocks of the fork point so it will preserve its ability to reorg
if self.nodes[2].getblockcount() < self.mainchainheight:
blocks_to_mine = first_reorg_height + 1 - self.mainchainheight
self.log.info("Rewind node 0 to prev main chain to mine longer chain to trigger redownload. Blocks needed: %d" % blocks_to_mine)
self.nodes[0].invalidateblock(curchainhash)
assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getblockcount(), self.mainchainheight)
assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getbestblockhash(), self.mainchainhash2)
goalbesthash = self.nodes[0].generate(blocks_to_mine)[-1]
goalbestheight = first_reorg_height + 1
self.log.info("Verify node 2 reorged back to the main chain, some blocks of which it had to redownload")
# Wait for Node 2 to reorg to proper height
self.wait_until(lambda: self.nodes[2].getblockcount() >= goalbestheight, timeout=900)
assert_equal(self.nodes[2].getbestblockhash(), goalbesthash)
# Verify we can now have the data for a block previously pruned
assert_equal(self.nodes[2].getblock(self.forkhash)["height"], self.forkheight)
def manual_test(self, node_number, use_timestamp):
# at this point, node has 995 blocks and has not yet run in prune mode
self.start_node(node_number, extra_args=["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance", "-txindex=0"])
node = self.nodes[node_number]
assert_equal(node.getblockcount(), 995)
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#23796: test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: This PR adds missing test coverage for the `pruneblockchain` RPC for the case that a future block or timestamp is passed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1101 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1111 Note that the test method `manual_test` gets called twice, once each with `use_timestamp` set to True/False, respectively. Depending on that, the helper function `height` either converts the passed block height to the timestamp of that block, or just returns it without modification. The other tests for failures in this RPC are also changed to be more detailled ("Cannot prune blocks because node is not in prune mode", "Negative block height"), as I don't think there is any value in just checking a sub-string. If there is ever an error with the same sub-string is introduced, it's not clear which error is exactly checked with the test, so it makes sense to be as specific as possible. ACKs for top commit: brunoerg: tACK 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf Tree-SHA512: bee3cee9f35c2a63a1839d7ec1f83e354d9d3c0c2ca32d300dca2de8b755d555f769ba2b80ac37d31df6ee7e2b8eaefb8134c4727a7144e47c0f5e34f2cc5822
2021-12-20 13:32:54 +01:00
assert_raises_rpc_error(-1, "Cannot prune blocks because node is not in prune mode", node.pruneblockchain, 500)
# now re-start in manual pruning mode
self.restart_node(node_number, extra_args=["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance", "-txindex=0", "-prune=1"], expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV)
node = self.nodes[node_number]
assert_equal(node.getblockcount(), 995)
def height(index):
if use_timestamp:
return node.getblockheader(node.getblockhash(index))["time"] + TIMESTAMP_WINDOW
else:
return index
def prune(index):
ret = node.pruneblockchain(height=height(index))
assert_equal(ret, node.getblockchaininfo()['pruneheight'])
def has_block(index):
return os.path.isfile(os.path.join(self.nodes[node_number].datadir, self.chain, "blocks", "blk{:05}.dat".format(index)))
# should not prune because chain tip of node 3 (995) < PruneAfterHeight (1000)
assert_raises_rpc_error(-1, "Blockchain is too short for pruning", node.pruneblockchain, height(500))
Merge #13451: rpc: expose CBlockIndex::nTx in getblock(header) 86edf4a2a502416ba8d6cebbce61030992f7ff6f expose CBlockIndex::nTx in getblock(header) (Gregory Sanders) Pull request description: Recent publication of a weakness in Bitcoin's merkle tree construction demonstrates many SPV applications vulnerable to an expensive to pull off yet still plausible attack: https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2018/06/09/leaf-node-weakness-in-bitcoin-merkle-tree-design/ Including the coinbase in the txoutproof seems the most effective fix, however results in a significant efficiency downgrade. Transactors will not even know a priori what the size of their proof will be within a couple orders of magnitude, unless they use the mid-state of SHA2 as detailed in the blog post. Some applications, like Elements blockchain platform that take SPV-style proofs have optional access to a bitcoind to verify these proofs of inclusion and check depth in the chain. Returning `CBlockIndex::nTx` would allow an extremely easy and compact way of checking the depth of the tree, with no additional overhead to the codebase, and works with pruned nodes. `getblockheader` is arguably not the place for it, but as mentioned before, is a natural workflow for us checking depth of a block in a possibly pruned node. We should also ensure that `verifytxoutproof` ends up validating this depth fact as well, but left this for another PR. Tree-SHA512: af4cf48e704c6088f8da06a477fda1aaa6f8770cee9b876c4465d1075966d6a95831a88817673fe5a0d6bbcdc1ffcbc1892e2be0d838c60fc6958d33eacdcc14
2018-06-14 19:38:19 +02:00
# Save block transaction count before pruning, assert value
block1_details = node.getblock(node.getblockhash(1))
assert_equal(block1_details["nTx"], len(block1_details["tx"]))
# mine 6 blocks so we are at height 1001 (i.e., above PruneAfterHeight)
node.generate(6)
assert_equal(node.getblockchaininfo()["blocks"], 1001)
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#23796: test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: This PR adds missing test coverage for the `pruneblockchain` RPC for the case that a future block or timestamp is passed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1101 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1111 Note that the test method `manual_test` gets called twice, once each with `use_timestamp` set to True/False, respectively. Depending on that, the helper function `height` either converts the passed block height to the timestamp of that block, or just returns it without modification. The other tests for failures in this RPC are also changed to be more detailled ("Cannot prune blocks because node is not in prune mode", "Negative block height"), as I don't think there is any value in just checking a sub-string. If there is ever an error with the same sub-string is introduced, it's not clear which error is exactly checked with the test, so it makes sense to be as specific as possible. ACKs for top commit: brunoerg: tACK 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf Tree-SHA512: bee3cee9f35c2a63a1839d7ec1f83e354d9d3c0c2ca32d300dca2de8b755d555f769ba2b80ac37d31df6ee7e2b8eaefb8134c4727a7144e47c0f5e34f2cc5822
2021-12-20 13:32:54 +01:00
# prune parameter in the future (block or timestamp) should raise an exception
future_parameter = height(1001) + 5
if use_timestamp:
assert_raises_rpc_error(-8, "Could not find block with at least the specified timestamp", node.pruneblockchain, future_parameter)
else:
assert_raises_rpc_error(-8, "Blockchain is shorter than the attempted prune height", node.pruneblockchain, future_parameter)
Merge #13451: rpc: expose CBlockIndex::nTx in getblock(header) 86edf4a2a502416ba8d6cebbce61030992f7ff6f expose CBlockIndex::nTx in getblock(header) (Gregory Sanders) Pull request description: Recent publication of a weakness in Bitcoin's merkle tree construction demonstrates many SPV applications vulnerable to an expensive to pull off yet still plausible attack: https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2018/06/09/leaf-node-weakness-in-bitcoin-merkle-tree-design/ Including the coinbase in the txoutproof seems the most effective fix, however results in a significant efficiency downgrade. Transactors will not even know a priori what the size of their proof will be within a couple orders of magnitude, unless they use the mid-state of SHA2 as detailed in the blog post. Some applications, like Elements blockchain platform that take SPV-style proofs have optional access to a bitcoind to verify these proofs of inclusion and check depth in the chain. Returning `CBlockIndex::nTx` would allow an extremely easy and compact way of checking the depth of the tree, with no additional overhead to the codebase, and works with pruned nodes. `getblockheader` is arguably not the place for it, but as mentioned before, is a natural workflow for us checking depth of a block in a possibly pruned node. We should also ensure that `verifytxoutproof` ends up validating this depth fact as well, but left this for another PR. Tree-SHA512: af4cf48e704c6088f8da06a477fda1aaa6f8770cee9b876c4465d1075966d6a95831a88817673fe5a0d6bbcdc1ffcbc1892e2be0d838c60fc6958d33eacdcc14
2018-06-14 19:38:19 +02:00
# Pruned block should still know the number of transactions
assert_equal(node.getblockheader(node.getblockhash(1))["nTx"], block1_details["nTx"])
# negative heights should raise an exception
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#23796: test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf test: check that pruneblockchain RPC fails for future block or timestamp (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: This PR adds missing test coverage for the `pruneblockchain` RPC for the case that a future block or timestamp is passed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1101 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/8c0bd871fcf6c5ff5851ccb18a7bc7554a0484b0/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1111 Note that the test method `manual_test` gets called twice, once each with `use_timestamp` set to True/False, respectively. Depending on that, the helper function `height` either converts the passed block height to the timestamp of that block, or just returns it without modification. The other tests for failures in this RPC are also changed to be more detailled ("Cannot prune blocks because node is not in prune mode", "Negative block height"), as I don't think there is any value in just checking a sub-string. If there is ever an error with the same sub-string is introduced, it's not clear which error is exactly checked with the test, so it makes sense to be as specific as possible. ACKs for top commit: brunoerg: tACK 140a49ce5e547a1b520a7cd063af8308184e7cbf Tree-SHA512: bee3cee9f35c2a63a1839d7ec1f83e354d9d3c0c2ca32d300dca2de8b755d555f769ba2b80ac37d31df6ee7e2b8eaefb8134c4727a7144e47c0f5e34f2cc5822
2021-12-20 13:32:54 +01:00
assert_raises_rpc_error(-8, "Negative block height", node.pruneblockchain, -10)
# height=100 too low to prune first block file so this is a no-op
prune(100)
assert has_block(0), "blk00000.dat is missing when should still be there"
# Does nothing
node.pruneblockchain(height(0))
assert has_block(0), "blk00000.dat is missing when should still be there"
# height=500 should prune first file
prune(500)
assert not has_block(0), "blk00000.dat is still there, should be pruned by now"
assert has_block(1), "blk00001.dat is missing when should still be there"
# height=650 should prune second file
prune(650)
assert not has_block(1), "blk00001.dat is still there, should be pruned by now"
# height=1000 should not prune anything more, because tip-288 is in blk00002.dat.
prune(1000)
assert has_block(2), "blk00002.dat is still there, should be pruned by now"
# advance the tip so blk00002.dat and blk00003.dat can be pruned (the last 288 blocks should now be in blk00004.dat)
node.generate(288)
prune(1000)
assert not has_block(2), "blk00002.dat is still there, should be pruned by now"
assert not has_block(3), "blk00003.dat is still there, should be pruned by now"
# stop node, start back up with auto-prune at 550 MiB, make sure still runs
self.restart_node(node_number, extra_args=["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance", "-txindex=0", "-prune=550"], expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV_PRUNE)
self.log.info("Success")
def wallet_test(self):
# check that the pruning node's wallet is still in good shape
self.log.info("Stop and start pruning node to trigger wallet rescan")
self.restart_node(2, extra_args=["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance", "-txindex=0", "-prune=550"], expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV_PRUNE)
self.log.info("Success")
# check that wallet loads successfully when restarting a pruned node after IBD.
# this was reported to fail in #7494.
self.log.info("Syncing node 5 to test wallet")
self.connect_nodes(0, 5)
nds = [self.nodes[0], self.nodes[5]]
self.sync_blocks(nds, wait=5, timeout=300)
self.restart_node(5, extra_args=["-dip3params=2000:2000", "-testactivationheight=dip0008@2000", "-disablegovernance", "-txindex=0", "-prune=550"], expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV_PRUNE) # restart to trigger rescan
self.log.info("Success")
def run_test(self):
self.log.info("Warning! This test requires 4GB of disk space")
self.log.info("Mining a big blockchain of 995 blocks")
self.create_big_chain()
# Chain diagram key:
# * blocks on main chain
# +,&,$,@ blocks on other forks
# X invalidated block
# N1 Node 1
#
# Start by mining a simple chain that all nodes have
# N0=N1=N2 **...*(995)
# stop manual-pruning node with 995 blocks
self.stop_node(3, expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV)
self.stop_node(4, expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV)
self.log.info("Check that we haven't started pruning yet because we're below PruneAfterHeight")
self.test_height_min()
# Extend this chain past the PruneAfterHeight
# N0=N1=N2 **...*(1020)
self.log.info("Check that we'll exceed disk space target if we have a very high stale block rate")
self.create_chain_with_staleblocks()
# Disconnect N0
# And mine a 24 block chain on N1 and a separate 25 block chain on N0
# N1=N2 **...*+...+(1044)
# N0 **...**...**(1045)
#
# reconnect nodes causing reorg on N1 and N2
# N1=N2 **...*(1020) *...**(1045)
# \
# +...+(1044)
#
# repeat this process until you have 12 stale forks hanging off the
# main chain on N1 and N2
# N0 *************************...***************************(1320)
#
# N1=N2 **...*(1020) *...**(1045) *.. ..**(1295) *...**(1320)
# \ \ \
# +...+(1044) &.. $...$(1319)
# Save some current chain state for later use
self.mainchainheight = self.nodes[2].getblockcount() # 1320
self.mainchainhash2 = self.nodes[2].getblockhash(self.mainchainheight)
self.log.info("Check that we can survive a 288 block reorg still")
self.reorg_test() # (1033, )
# Now create a 288 block reorg by mining a longer chain on N1
# First disconnect N1
# Then invalidate 1033 on main chain and 1032 on fork so height is 1032 on main chain
# N1 **...*(1020) **...**(1032)X..
# \
# ++...+(1031)X..
#
# Now mine 300 more blocks on N1
# N1 **...*(1020) **...**(1032) @@...@(1332)
# \ \
# \ X...
# \ \
# ++...+(1031)X.. ..
#
# Reconnect nodes and mine 220 more blocks on N1
# N1 **...*(1020) **...**(1032) @@...@@@(1552)
# \ \
# \ X...
# \ \
# ++...+(1031)X.. ..
#
# N2 **...*(1020) **...**(1032) @@...@@@(1552)
# \ \
# \ *...**(1320)
# \ \
# ++...++(1044) ..
#
# N0 ********************(1032) @@...@@@(1552)
# \
# *...**(1320)
self.log.info("Test that we can rerequest a block we previously pruned if needed for a reorg")
self.reorg_back()
# Verify that N2 still has block 1033 on current chain (@), but not on main chain (*)
# Invalidate 1033 on current chain (@) on N2 and we should be able to reorg to
# original main chain (*), but will require redownload of some blocks
# In order to have a peer we think we can download from, must also perform this invalidation
# on N0 and mine a new longest chain to trigger.
# Final result:
# N0 ********************(1032) **...****(1553)
# \
# X@...@@@(1552)
#
# N2 **...*(1020) **...**(1032) **...****(1553)
# \ \
# \ X@...@@@(1552)
# \
# +..
#
# N1 doesn't change because 1033 on main chain (*) is invalid
self.log.info("Test manual pruning with block indices")
self.manual_test(3, use_timestamp=False)
self.log.info("Test manual pruning with timestamps")
self.manual_test(4, use_timestamp=True)
if self.is_wallet_compiled():
self.log.info("Test wallet re-scan")
self.wallet_test()
self.log.info("Test invalid pruning command line options")
self.test_invalid_command_line_options()
# NOTE: this is a Dash-specific part, it should be the very last one before "Done"
self.log.info("Stopping pruned nodes manually")
for i in range(2, 6):
self.log.info("Stopping pruned node%d" % i)
self.stop_node(i, expected_stderr=EXPECTED_STDERR_NO_GOV_PRUNE)
self.log.info("Done")
if __name__ == '__main__':
PruneTest().main()