* consensus: calculate prevote message delay metric (#7551)
## What does this pull request do?
This pull requests adds two metrics intended for use in calculating an experimental value for `MessageDelay`.
The metrics are as follows:
```
# HELP tendermint_consensus_complete_prevote_message_delay Difference in seconds between the proposal timestamp and the timestamp of the prevote that achieved 100% of the voting power in the prevote step.
# TYPE tendermint_consensus_complete_prevote_message_delay gauge
tendermint_consensus_complete_prevote_message_delay{chain_id="test-chain-aZbwF1"} 0.013025505
# HELP tendermint_consensus_quorum_prevote_message_delay Difference in seconds between the proposal timestamp and the timestamp of the prevote that achieved a quorum in the prevote step.
# TYPE tendermint_consensus_quorum_prevote_message_delay gauge
tendermint_consensus_quorum_prevote_message_delay{chain_id="test-chain-aZbwF1"} 0.013025505
```
## Why this change?
For more information on what these metrics are calculating, see #7202. The aim is to merge to backport these metrics to v0.34 and run nodes on a few popular chains with these metrics to determine the experimental values for `MessageDelay` on these popular chains and use these to select our default `SynchronyParams.MessageDelay` value.
## Why Gauges for the metrics?
Gauges allow us to overwrite the metric on each successive observation. We can then capture these metrics over time to track the highest and lowest observed value.
(cherry picked from commit 0c82ceaa5f)
# Conflicts:
# internal/consensus/state.go
* fix merge conflicts
Co-authored-by: William Banfield <4561443+williambanfield@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: William Banfield <wbanfield@gmail.com>
The code in the Tendermint repository makes heavy use of import aliasing.
This is made necessary by our extensive reuse of common base package names, and
by repetition of similar names across different subdirectories.
Unfortunately we have not been very consistent about which packages we alias in
various circumstances, and the aliases we use vary. In the spirit of the advice
in the style guide and https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments#imports,
his change makes an effort to clean up and normalize import aliasing.
This change makes no API or behavioral changes. It is a pure cleanup intended
o help make the code more readable to developers (including myself) trying to
understand what is being imported where.
Only unexported names have been modified, and the changes were generated and
applied mechanically with gofmt -r and comby, respecting the lexical and
syntactic rules of Go. Even so, I did not fix every inconsistency. Where the
changes would be too disruptive, I left it alone.
The principles I followed in this cleanup are:
- Remove aliases that restate the package name.
- Remove aliases where the base package name is unambiguous.
- Move overly-terse abbreviations from the import to the usage site.
- Fix lexical issues (remove underscores, remove capitalization).
- Fix import groupings to more closely match the style guide.
- Group blank (side-effecting) imports and ensure they are commented.
- Add aliases to multiple imports with the same base package name.
This document attempts to capture and discuss some of the areas of Tendermint that seem to be cited as causing performance issue. I'm hoping to continue to gather feedback and input on this document to better understand what issues Tendermint performance may cause for our users.
The overall goal of this document is to allow the maintainers and community to get a better sense of these issues and to be more capably able to discuss them and weight trade-offs about any proposed performance-focused changes. This document does not aim to propose any performance improvements. It does suggest useful places for benchmarks and places where additional metrics would be useful for diagnosing and further understanding Tendermint performance.
Please comment with areas where my reasoning seems off or with additional areas that Tendermint performance may be causing user pain.
Issues reported in Osmosis, where the message is extremely long. Also, there is absolutely no reason to log the message IMO. If we must, we can make the message log DEBUG.
## Description
Change block_size gauge to a histogram to observe block size overtime
This will help will see which chains have full blocks vs empty.
closes#5752
