order | title |
---|---|
4 |
CometBFT's expected behavior |
This section describes what the Application can expect from CometBFT.
The Tendermint consensus algorithm, currently adopted in CometBFT, is designed to protect safety under any network conditions, as long as less than 1/3 of validators' voting power is byzantine. Most of the time, though, the network will behave synchronously, no process will fall behind, and there will be no byzantine process. The following describes what will happen during a block height h in these frequent, benign conditions:
- Consensus will decide in round 0, for height h;
PrepareProposal
will be called exactly once at the proposer process of round 0, height h;ProcessProposal
will be called exactly once at all processes, and will return accept in itsResponse*
;ExtendVote
will be called exactly once at all processes;VerifyVoteExtension
will be called exactly n-1 times at each validator process, where n is the number of validators, and will always return accept in itsResponse*
;FinalizeBlock
will be called exactly once at all processes, conveying the same prepared block that all calls toPrepareProposal
andProcessProposal
had previously reported for height h; andCommit
will finally be called exactly once at all processes at the end of height h.
However, the Application logic must be ready to cope with any possible run of the consensus algorithm for a given height, including bad periods (byzantine proposers, network being asynchronous). In these cases, the sequence of calls to ABCI++ methods may not be so straightforward, but the Application should still be able to handle them, e.g., without crashing. The purpose of this section is to define what these sequences look like in a precise way.
As mentioned in the Basic Concepts section, CometBFT acts as a client of ABCI++ and the Application acts as a server. Thus, it is up to CometBFT to determine when and in which order the different ABCI++ methods will be called. A well-written Application design should consider any of these possible sequences.
The following grammar, written in case-sensitive Augmented Backus–Naur form (ABNF, specified in IETF rfc7405), specifies all possible sequences of calls to ABCI++, taken by a correct process, across all heights from the genesis block, including recovery runs, from the point of view of the Application.
start = clean-start / recovery
clean-start = init-chain [state-sync] consensus-exec
state-sync = *state-sync-attempt success-sync info
state-sync-attempt = offer-snapshot *apply-chunk
success-sync = offer-snapshot 1*apply-chunk
recovery = info consensus-exec
consensus-exec = (inf)consensus-height
consensus-height = *consensus-round decide commit
consensus-round = proposer / non-proposer
proposer = *got-vote [prepare-proposal [process-proposal]] [extend]
extend = *got-vote extend-vote *got-vote
non-proposer = *got-vote [process-proposal] [extend]
init-chain = %s"<InitChain>"
offer-snapshot = %s"<OfferSnapshot>"
apply-chunk = %s"<ApplySnapshotChunk>"
info = %s"<Info>"
prepare-proposal = %s"<PrepareProposal>"
process-proposal = %s"<ProcessProposal>"
extend-vote = %s"<ExtendVote>"
got-vote = %s"<VerifyVoteExtension>"
decide = %s"<FinalizeBlock>"
commit = %s"<Commit>"
We have kept some ABCI methods out of the grammar, in order to keep it as clear and concise as possible. A common reason for keeping all these methods out is that they all can be called at any point in a sequence defined by the grammar above. Other reasons depend on the method in question:
Echo
andFlush
are only used for debugging purposes. Further, their handling by the Application should be trivial.CheckTx
is detached from the main method call sequence that drives block execution.Query
provides read-only access to the current Application state, so handling it should also be independent from block execution.- Similarly,
ListSnapshots
andLoadSnapshotChunk
provide read-only access to the Application's previously created snapshots (if any), and help populate the parameters ofOfferSnapshot
andApplySnapshotChunk
at a process performing state-sync while bootstrapping. UnlikeListSnapshots
andLoadSnapshotChunk
, bothOfferSnapshot
andApplySnapshotChunk
are included in the grammar.
Finally, method Info
is a special case. The method's purpose is three-fold, it can be used
- as part of handling an RPC call from an external client,
- as a handshake between CometBFT and the Application upon recovery to check whether any blocks need to be replayed, and
- at the end of state-sync to verify that the correct state has been reached.
We have left Info
's first purpose out of the grammar for the same reasons as all the others: it can happen
at any time, and has nothing to do with the block execution sequence. The second and third purposes, on the other
hand, are present in the grammar.
Let us now examine the grammar line by line, providing further details.
- When a process starts, it may do so for the first time or after a crash (it is recovering).
start = clean-start / recovery
- If the process is starting from scratch, CometBFT first calls
InitChain
, then it may optionally start a state-sync mechanism to catch up with other processes. Finally, it enters normal consensus execution.
clean-start = init-chain [state-sync] consensus-exec
- In state-sync mode, CometBFT makes one or more attempts at synchronizing the Application's state.
At the beginning of each attempt, it offers the Application a snapshot found at another process.
If the Application accepts the snapshot, a sequence of calls to
ApplySnapshotChunk
method follow to provide the Application with all the snapshots needed, in order to reconstruct the state locally. A successful attempt must provide at least one chunk viaApplySnapshotChunk
. At the end of a successful attempt, CometBFT callsInfo
to make sure the reconstructed state's AppHash matches the one in the block header at the corresponding height. Note that the state of the application does not contain vote extensions itself. The application can rely on CometBFT to ensure the node has all the relevant data to proceed with the execution beyond this point.
state-sync = *state-sync-attempt success-sync info state-sync-attempt = offer-snapshot *apply-chunk success-sync = offer-snapshot 1*apply-chunk
- In recovery mode, CometBFT first calls
Info
to know from which height it needs to replay decisions to the Application. After this, CometBFT enters consensus execution, first in replay mode and then in normal mode.
recovery = info consensus-exec
- The non-terminal
consensus-exec
is a key point in this grammar. It is an infinite sequence of consensus heights. The grammar is thus an omega-grammar, since it produces infinite sequences of terminals (i.e., the API calls).
consensus-exec = (inf)consensus-height
- A consensus height consists of zero or more rounds before deciding and executing via a call to
FinalizeBlock
, followed by a call toCommit
. In each round, the sequence of method calls depends on whether the local process is the proposer or not. Note that, if a height contains zero rounds, this means the process is replaying an already decided value (catch-up mode).
consensus-height = *consensus-round decide commit consensus-round = proposer / non-proposer
-
For every round, if the local process is the proposer of the current round, CometBFT calls
PrepareProposal
. A successful execution ofPrepareProposal
implies in a proposal block being (i)signed and (ii)stored (e.g., in stable storage).A crash during this step will direct how the node proceeds the next time it is executed, for the same round, after restarted. If it crashed before (i), then, during the recovery,
PrepareProposal
will execute as if for the first time. Following a crash between (i) and (ii) and in (the likely) casePrepareProposal
produces a different block, the signing of this block will fail, which means that the new block will not be stored or broadcast. If the crash happened after (ii), then signing fails but nothing happens to the stored block.If a block was stored, it is sent to all validators, including the proposer. Receiving a proposal block triggers
ProcessProposal
with such a block.Then, optionally, the Application is asked to extend its vote for that round. Calls to
VerifyVoteExtension
can come at any time: the local process may be slightly late in the current round, or votes may come from a future round of this height.
proposer = *got-vote [prepare-proposal [process-proposal]] [extend] extend = *got-vote extend-vote *got-vote
- Also for every round, if the local process is not the proposer of the current round, CometBFT
will call
ProcessProposal
at most once. At most one call toExtendVote
may occur only afterProcessProposal
is called. A number of calls toVerifyVoteExtension
can occur in any order with respect toProcessProposal
andExtendVote
throughout the round. The reasons are the same as above, namely, the process running slightly late in the current round, or votes from future rounds of this height received.
non-proposer = *got-vote [process-proposal] [extend]
- Finally, the grammar describes all its terminal symbols, which denote the different ABCI++ method calls that may appear in a sequence.
init-chain = %s"<InitChain>" offer-snapshot = %s"<OfferSnapshot>" apply-chunk = %s"<ApplySnapshotChunk>" info = %s"<Info>" prepare-proposal = %s"<PrepareProposal>" process-proposal = %s"<ProcessProposal>" extend-vote = %s"<ExtendVote>" got-vote = %s"<VerifyVoteExtension>" decide = %s"<FinalizeBlock>" commit = %s"<Commit>"
In some cases, an existing Application using the legacy ABCI may need to be adapted to work with ABCI++ with as minimal changes as possible. In this case, of course, ABCI++ will not provide any advantage with respect to the existing implementation, but will keep the same guarantees already provided by ABCI. Here is how ABCI++ methods should be implemented.
First of all, all the methods that did not change from ABCI 0.17.0 to ABCI 2.0, namely Echo
, Flush
, Info
, InitChain
,
Query
, CheckTx
, ListSnapshots
, LoadSnapshotChunk
, OfferSnapshot
, and ApplySnapshotChunk
, do not need
to undergo any changes in their implementation.
As for the new methods:
-
PrepareProposal
must create a list of transactions by copying over the transaction list passed inRequestPrepareProposal.txs
, in the same order.The Application must check whether the size of all transactions exceeds the byte limit (
RequestPrepareProposal.max_tx_bytes
). If so, the Application must remove transactions at the end of the list until the total byte size is at or below the limit. -
ProcessProposal
must setResponseProcessProposal.status
to accept and return. -
ExtendVote
is to setResponseExtendVote.extension
to an empty byte array and return. -
VerifyVoteExtension
must setResponseVerifyVoteExtension.accept
to true if the extension is an empty byte array and false otherwise, then return. -
FinalizeBlock
is to coalesce the implementation of methodsBeginBlock
,DeliverTx
, andEndBlock
. Legacy applications looking to reuse old code that implementedDeliverTx
should wrap the legacyDeliverTx
logic in a loop that executes one transaction iteration per transaction inRequestFinalizeBlock.tx
.
Finally, Commit
, which is kept in ABCI++, no longer returns the AppHash
. It is now up to
FinalizeBlock
to do so. Thus, a slight refactoring of the old Commit
implementation will be
needed to move the return of AppHash
to FinalizeBlock
.
In a manner transparent to the application, CometBFT ensures the node is provided with all the data it needs to participate in consensus.
In the case of recovering from a crash, or joining the network via state sync, CometBFT will make sure the node acquires the necessary vote extensions before switching to consensus.
If a node is already in consensus but falls behind, during catch-up, CometBFT will provide the node with
vote extensions from past heights by retrieving the extensions within ExtendedCommit
for old heights that it had previously stored.
We realize this is sub-optimal due to the increase in storage needed to store the extensions, we are
working on an optimization of this implementation which should alleviate this concern.
However, the application can use the existing retain_height
parameter to decide how much
history it wants to keep, just as is done with the block history. The network-wide implications
of the usage of retain_height
stay the same.
The decision to store
historical commits and potential optimizations, are discussed in detail in RFC-100
If applications upgrade to ABCI 2.0, CometBFT internally ensures that the application setup is reflected in its operation.
CometBFT retrieves from the application configuration the value of VoteExtensionsEnableHeight
( he,),
the height at which vote extensions are required for consensus to proceed, and uses it to determine the data it stores and data it sends to a peer that is catching up.
Namely, upon saving the block for a given height h in the block store at decision time
- if h ≥ he, the corresponding extended commit that was used to decide locally is saved as well
- if h < he, there are no changes to the data saved
In the catch-up mechanism, when a node f realizes that another peer is at height hp, which is more than 2 heights behind,
- if hp ≥ he, f uses the extended commit to reconstruct the precommit votes with their corresponding extensions
- if hp < he, f uses the canonical commit to reconstruct the precommit votes, as done for ABCI 1.0 and earlier.