I had a report of a 0.7.2 user whose node hadn't appeared on 1ml. Their
node_announcement wasn't visible to my node, either.
I suspect this is a consequence of recent version reducing the amount of
gossip they send, as well as large nodes increasingly turning off gossip
altogether from some peers (as we do). We should ignore timestamp filters
for our own channels: the easiest way to do this is to push them out
directly from gossipd (other messages are sent via the store).
We change channeld to wrap the local channel_announcements: previously
we just handed it to gossipd as for any other gossip message we received
from our peer. Now gossipd knows to push it out, as it's local.
This interferes with the logic in tests/test_misc.py::test_htlc_send_timeout
which expects the node_announcement message last, so we generalize
that too.
[ Thanks to @trueptolmy for bugfix! ]
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Keeping the uintmap ordering all the broadcastable messages is expensive:
130MB for the million-channels project. But now we delete obsolete entries
from the store, we can have the per-peer daemons simply read that sequentially
and stream the gossip itself.
This is the most primitive version, where all gossip is streamed;
successive patches will bring back proper handling of timestamp filtering
and initial_routing_sync.
We add a gossip_state field to track what's happening with our gossip
streaming: it's initialized in gossipd, and currently always set, but
once we handle timestamps the per-peer daemon may do it when the first
filter is sent.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
They already send *us* gossip messages, so they have to be distinct anyway.
Why make us both do extra work?
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Instead of reading the store ourselves, we can just send them an
offset. This saves gossipd a lot of work, putting it where it belongs
(in the daemon responsible for the specific peer).
MCP bench results:
store_load_msec:28509-31001(29206.6+/-9.4e+02)
vsz_kb:580004-580016(580006+/-4.8)
store_rewrite_sec:11.640000-12.730000(11.908+/-0.41)
listnodes_sec:1.790000-1.880000(1.83+/-0.032)
listchannels_sec:21.180000-21.950000(21.476+/-0.27)
routing_sec:2.210000-11.160000(7.126+/-3.1)
peer_write_all_sec:36.270000-41.200000(38.168+/-1.9)
Signficant savings in streaming gossip:
-peer_write_all_sec:48.160000-51.480000(49.608+/-1.1)
+peer_write_all_sec:35.780000-37.980000(36.43+/-0.81)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I tried to just do gossipd, but it was uncontainable, so this ended up being
a complete sweep.
We didn't get much space saving in gossipd, even though we should save
24 bytes per node.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
As a side-effect of using amount_msat in gossipd/routing.c, we explicitly
handle overflows and don't need to pre-prune ridiculous-fee channels.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This avoids some very ugly switch() statements which mixed the two,
but we also take the chance to rename 'towire_gossip_' to
'towire_gossipd_' for those inter-daemon messages; they're messages to
gossipd, not gossip messages.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell
lisa neigut