Skip to content

Conversation

@tsachiherman
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

The catchup was occasionally reporting

(1): fetchAndWrite(13932148): ledger write failed: block evaluation for round 13932148 requires sequential evaluation while the latest round is 13932148

This issue indicates that the catchup was attempting to validate a block which is not the latest+1, but rather newer.
In this case, we can safely ignore this error, and skip applying this block, since the block was already added to the ledger.

Test Plan

Tested manually.

Copy link
Contributor

@algonautshant algonautshant left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

@tsachiherman tsachiherman merged commit 72a1717 into algorand:master Oct 25, 2021
@tsachiherman tsachiherman deleted the tsachi/catchupBenignWarning branch October 25, 2021 16:20
onetechnical pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2021
## Summary

The catchup was occasionally reporting
```
(1): fetchAndWrite(13932148): ledger write failed: block evaluation for round 13932148 requires sequential evaluation while the latest round is 13932148
```

This issue indicates that the catchup was attempting to validate a block which is not the latest+1, but rather newer.
In this case, we can safely ignore this error, and skip applying this block, since the block was already added to the ledger.

## Test Plan

Tested manually.
cce pushed a commit to cce/go-algorand that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2021
## Summary

The catchup was occasionally reporting
```
(1): fetchAndWrite(13932148): ledger write failed: block evaluation for round 13932148 requires sequential evaluation while the latest round is 13932148
```

This issue indicates that the catchup was attempting to validate a block which is not the latest+1, but rather newer.
In this case, we can safely ignore this error, and skip applying this block, since the block was already added to the ledger.

## Test Plan

Tested manually.
@egieseke egieseke mentioned this pull request Nov 23, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants