Contents
- 2022-03-30: Initial draft. (@tychoish)
- 2022-04-25: Imported document to tendermint repository. (@tychoish)
This document describes a collection of projects that might be good for new engineers joining the Tendermint Core team. These projects mostly describe features that we'd be very excited to see land in the code base, but that are intentionally outside of the critical path of a release on the roadmap, and have the following properties that we think make good on-boarding projects:
- require relatively little context for the project or its history beyond a more isolated area of the code.
- provide exposure to different areas of the codebase, so new team members will have reason to explore the code base, build relationships with people on the team, and gain experience with more than one area of the system.
- be of moderate size, striking a healthy balance between trivial or mechanical changes (which provide little insight) and large intractable changes that require deeper insight than is available during onboarding to address well. A good size project should have natural touchpoints or check-ins.
Before diving into one of these projects, have a conversation about the project or aspects of Tendermint that you're excited to work on with your onboarding buddy. This will help make sure that these issues are still relevant, help you get any context, underatnding known pitfalls, and to confirm a high level approach or design (if relevant.) On-boarding buddies should be prepared to do some design work before someone joins the team.
The descriptions that follow provide some basic background and attempt to describe the user stories and the potential impact of these project.
Tendermint's E2E framework makes it possible to run small test networks with different Tendermint configurations, and make sure that the system works. The tests run Tendermint in a separate binary, and the system provides some very high level protection against making changes that could break Tendermint in otherwise difficult to detect ways.
Working on the E2E system is a good place to get introduced to the Tendermint codebase, particularly for developers who are newer to Go, as the E2E system (generator, runner, etc.) is distinct from the rest of Tendermint and comparatively quite small, so it may be easier to begin making changes in this area. At the same time, because the E2E system exercises all of Tendermint, work in this area is a good way to get introduced to various components of the system.
All E2E tests use the same workload (e.g. generated transactions, submitted to different nodes in the network,) which has been tuned empirically to provide a gentle but consistent parallel load that all E2E tests can pass. Ideally, the workload generator could be configurable to have different shapes of work (bursty, different transaction sizes, weighted to different nodes, etc.) and even perhaps further parameterized within a basic shape, which would make it possible to use our existing test infrastructure to answer different questions about the performance or capability of the system.
The work would involve adding a new parameter to the E2E test manifest, and creating an option (e.g. "legacy") for the current load generation model, extract configurations options for the current load generation, and then prototype implementations of alternate load generation, and also run some preliminary using the tools.
There are two main kinds of integration tests in Tendermint: the E2E test
framework, and then a collection of integration tests that masquerade as
unit-tests. While some of this expansion of test scope is (potentially)
inevitable, the masquerading unit tests (e.g consensus.byzantine_test.go)
end up being difficult to understand, difficult to maintain, and unreliable.
One solution to this, would be to modify the E2E ABCI application to allow it to inject byzantine behavior, and then have this be a configurable aspect of a test network to be able to provoke Byzantine behavior in a "real" system and then observe that evidence is constructed. This would make it possible to remove the legacy tests entirely once the new tests have proven themselves.
The orchestration of e2e test processes is presently done using docker compose, which works well, but has proven a bit limiting as all processes need to run on a single machine, and the log aggregation functions are confusing at best.
This project would replace the current orchestration with something more generic, potentially maintaining the current system, but also allowing the e2e tests to manage processes using k8s. There are a few "local" k8s frameworks (e.g. kind and k3s,) which might be able to be useful for our current testing model, but hopefully, we could use this new implementation with other k8s systems for more flexible distribute test orchestration.
The e2e test runner currently runs a single test, and in most cases we manage
the test cases using a shell script that ensure cleanup of entire test
suites. This is a bit difficult to maintain and makes reproduction of test
cases more awkward than it should be. The e2e runner itself should provide
equivalent functionality to run-multiple.sh: ensure cleanup of test cases,
collect and process output, and be able to manage entire suites of cases.
It might also be useful to implement an e2e test orchestrator that runs all tendermint instances in a single process, using "real" networks for faster feedback and iteration during development.
In addition to being a bit easier to maintain, having a more capable runner implementation would make it easier to collect data from test runs, improve debugability and reporting.
While there are some parallelism in the execution of e2e tests, each e2e test job must build a tendermint e2e image, which takes about 5 minutes of CPU time per-task, which given the size of each of the runs.
We'd like to be able to reduce the amount of overhead per-e2e tests while keeping the cycle time for working with the tests very low, while also maintaining a reasonable level of test coverage. This is an impossible tradeoff, in some ways, and the percentage of overhead at the moment is large enough that we can make some material progress with a moderate amount of time.
Most of this work has to do with modifying github actions configuration and e2e artifact (docker) building to reduce redundant work. Eventually, when we can drop the requirement for CGo storage engines, it will be possible to move (cross) compile tendermint locally, and then inject the binary into the docker container, which would reduce a lot of the build-time complexity, although we can move more in this direction or have runtime flags to disable CGo dependencies for local development.
There are lots of places in the code base which can panic, and would not be particularly well handled. While in some cases, panics are the right answer, in many cases the panics were just added to simplify downstream error checking, and could easily be converted to errors.
The Don't Panic RFC covers some of the background and approach.
While the changes are in this project are relatively rote, this will provide exposure to lots of different areas of the codebase as well as insight into how different areas of the codebase interact with eachother, as well as experience with the test suites and infrastructure.
Tendermint maintains two very simple ABCI applications (a KV application used for basic testing, and slightly more advanced test application used in the end-to-end tests). Writing an application would provide a new engineer with useful experiences using Tendermint that mirrors the expierence of downstream users.
This is more of an exploratory project, but could include providing common
interfaces on top of Tendermint consensus for other well known protocols or
tools (e.g. etcd) or a DNS server or some other tool.
Currently reactors (the internal processes that are responsible for the higher level behavior of Tendermint) can be started and stopped, but have no provision for being paused. These additional semantics may allow Tendermint to pause reactors (and avoid processing their messhages, etc.) and allow better coordination in the future.
While this is a big project, it's possible to break this apart into many smaller projects: make p2p channels pauseable, add pause/UN-pause hooks to the service implementation and machinery, and finally to modify the reactor implementations to take advantage of these additional semantics
This project would give an engineer some exposure to the p2p layer of the code, as well as to various aspects of the reactor implementations.
Tendermint has a metrics system that is relatively underutilized, and figuring out ways to capture and organize the metrics to provide value to users might provide an interesting set of projects for new engineers on Tendermint.
Because the tendermint logs tend to be quite verbose and not particularly actionable, most users largely ignore the logging or run at very low verbosity. While the log statements in the code do describe useful events, taken as a whole the system is not particularly tractable, and particularly at the Debug level, not useful. One solution to this problem is to identify log messages that might be (e.g. increment a counter for certian kinds of errors)
One approach might be to look at various logging statements, particularly debug statements or errors that are logged but not returned, and see if they're convertable to counters or other metrics.
The existing Tendermint test suites replace the metrics infrastructure with no-op implementations, which means that tests can neither verify that metrics are ever recorded, nor can tests use metrics to observe events in the system. Writing an implementation, for testing, that makes it possible to record metrics and provides an API for introspecting this data, as well as potentially writing tests that take advantage of this type, could be useful.
In some systems, the logging system itself can provide some interesting insights for operators: having metrics that track the number of messages at different levels as well as the total number of messages, can act as a canary for the system as a whole.
This should be achievable by adding an interceptor layer within the logging package itself that can add metrics to the existing system.