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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug] Peers are not sufficiently connecting to each other #3196

Closed
vicsn opened this issue Mar 29, 2024 · 2 comments 路 Fixed by #3198
Closed

[Bug] Peers are not sufficiently connecting to each other #3196

vicsn opened this issue Mar 29, 2024 · 2 comments 路 Fixed by #3198
Assignees
Labels
bug Incorrect or unexpected behavior

Comments

@vicsn
Copy link
Collaborator

vicsn commented Mar 29, 2024

馃悰 Bug Report

It seems that our nodes are not connected as optimally as we'd like. Perhaps existing PRs (link) will improve the situation

Steps to Reproduce

Set up a network with 10 validators and 100 clients. The 10 validators should connect to each other, and each validator should connect to 10 trusted peers using --peers. We would prefer snarkos_router_connected_total to approach 19, but it is only 8.

In contrast, a local default devnet.sh run does reveal N-1 validators are connected via snarkos_router_connected_total.

Your Environment

SnarkOS commit 491f3078a.

@vicsn vicsn added the bug Incorrect or unexpected behavior label Mar 29, 2024
@kpandl
Copy link
Contributor

kpandl commented Mar 29, 2024

Some further observations when testing with commit b1bd3bf7457a162641b835d97adb8b6405bef6ed (branch optional_node_ip):

  • In the past, the validators logged Connected to ... peers [...] not only for clients but also for validators. It seems like currently it shows only clients, or when no clients are running, it shows No connected peers
  • Client connections seem to be dropped, potentially for reasons other than a PeerRefresh. One log I saw after dropping was WARN Attempted to send to a non-connected peer ...

@vicsn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

vicsn commented Mar 29, 2024

We should check that this PR did not introduce a regression: #3163

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Incorrect or unexpected behavior
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants