-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Use all valid routes during blinded path construction #9334
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are limited to specific labels. 🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)
Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the 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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
This seems like the simpler solution to implement. Since we’re already querying all routes in FindBlindedPaths, it makes sense to just return them. However, it might be worthwhile to introduce a hard constant cap during the pathfinding process to prevent the array size from growing exponentially. Currently, the algorithm explores all possible paths within the given constraints. Instead, we could stop after finding, say, 100 routes in total, and then apply filtering to select the MaxNumPaths in BuildBlindedPaymentPaths, as proposed in this PR. Probably the constraints of the Min/Max Hop number prevents these high numbers for routes but I think having a cap is kind of a sanity check. |
Before the proposed changes we are querying all routes, sorting the routes based on probability and them capping them based on |
I think we need to do way more when creating the path rather than creating the path and later checking the probability this does not seem efficient. I think we should build the path in the first place based on probability not just running a depth first search on all available paths. But I am not sure how difficult that might be because we went with the recusrive approach. |
I think we might compute the total probability and sort the path list during the creation of it (into |
yes let's keep it as is and focus only on the underlying issue. |
MaxNumPaths restriction moved from FindBlindedPaths to BuildBlindedPaymentPaths this way we can interact through all possibly routes when creating a new blinded path.
Hello @ziggie1984 gently reminder of review 😉 |
@ziggie1984: review reminder |
unit-test fail ! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking good I am missing 2 things here:
- Can you add some logging stats how many routes are find in total, then how many are filtered out because of the probability as for example debug information. I am very curious whether routes will fail often at the level where the final route and relay information is accumulated.
- I tend to introduce a max route variable for the blinded path finding in general, maybe a default of 50 routes, otherwise we look for everything which with a big number of blinded hops might be wasteful.
@@ -132,8 +135,11 @@ func BuildBlindedPaymentPaths(cfg *BuildBlindedPathCfg) ( | |||
paths := make([]*zpay32.BlindedPaymentPath, 0, len(routes)) | |||
|
|||
// For each route returned, we will construct the associated blinded | |||
// payment path. | |||
// payment path, until the maximum number of allowed paths. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
of allowed paths is reached.
}, | ||
) | ||
require.NoError(t, err) | ||
assertPaths(routes, []string{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we still check here the expected number of paths now
@@ -6168,6 +6168,7 @@ func (r *rpcServer) AddInvoice(ctx context.Context, | |||
MaxHTLCMsat: 0, | |||
}, | |||
MinNumPathHops: blindingRestrictions.NumHops, | |||
MaxNumPaths: blindingRestrictions.MaxNumPaths, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can you add a unit-test which tests this selection
Fixes #9076
MaxNumPaths restriction moved from
FindBlindedPaths
toBuildBlindedPaymentPaths
this way we can interact through all possibly routes.If the reviewers agreed to this approach we will have to modify the
TestFindBlindedPathsWithMC
because it is considering that MaxNumPaths retriction is applied onFindBlindedPaths
function.