9 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sean Braithwaite
671c5c9b84 crypto: Proof of Concept for iterative version of SimpleHashFromByteSlices (#2611) (#3530)
(#2611) had suggested that an iterative version of
SimpleHashFromByteSlice would be faster, presumably because
 we can envision some overhead accumulating from stack
frames and function calls. Additionally, a recursive algorithm risks
hitting the stack limit and causing a stack overflow should the tree
be too large.

Provided here is an iterative alternative, a simple test to assert
correctness and a benchmark. On the performance side, there appears to
be no overall difference:

```
BenchmarkSimpleHashAlternatives/recursive-4                20000 77677 ns/op
BenchmarkSimpleHashAlternatives/iterative-4                20000 76802 ns/op
```

On the surface it might seem that the additional overhead is due to
the different allocation patterns of the implementations. The recursive
version uses a single `[][]byte` slices which it then re-slices at each level of the tree.
The iterative version reproduces `[][]byte` once within the function and
then rewrites sub-slices of that array at each level of the tree.

Eexperimenting by modifying the code to simply calculate the
hash and not store the result show little to no difference in performance.

These preliminary results suggest:
1. The performance of the current implementation is pretty good
2. Go has low overhead for recursive functions
3. The performance of the SimpleHashFromByteSlice routine is dominated
by the actual hashing of data

Although this work is in no way exhaustive, point #3 suggests that
optimizations of this routine would need to take an alternative
approach to make significant improvements on the current performance.

Finally, considering that the recursive implementation is easier to
read, it might not be worthwhile to switch to a less intuitive
implementation for so little benefit.

* re-add slice re-writing
* [crypto] Document SimpleHashFromByteSlicesIterative
2019-04-18 17:31:36 +02:00
Dev Ojha
ec53ce359b Simple merkle rfc compatibility (#2713)
* Begin simple merkle compatibility PR

* Fix query_test

* Use trillian test vectors

* Change the split point per RFC 6962

* update spec

* refactor innerhash to match spec

* Update changelog

* Address @liamsi's comments

* Write the comment requested by @liamsi
2019-01-13 18:02:38 -05:00
Dev Ojha
12fa9d1cab crypto/merkle: Remove byter in favor of plain byte slices (#2595)
* crypto/merkle: Remove byter in favor of plain byte slices

This PR is fully backwards compatible in terms of function output!
(The Go API differs though) The only test case changes was to refactor
it to be table driven.

* Update godocs per review comments
2018-10-10 12:46:09 -04:00
Joon
71a34adfe5 General Merkle Proof (#2298)
* first commit

finalize rebase

add protoc_merkle to Makefile

* in progress

* fix kvstore

* fix tests

* remove iavl dependency

* fix tx_test

* fix test_abci_cli

fix test_apps

* fix test_apps

* fix test_cover

* rm rebase residue

* address comment in progress

* finalize rebase
2018-09-28 20:03:19 -04:00
Dev Ojha
2756be5a59 libs: Remove usage of custom Fmt, in favor of fmt.Sprintf (#2199)
* libs: Remove usage of custom Fmt, in favor of fmt.Sprintf

Closes #2193

* Fix bug that was masked by custom Fmt!
2018-08-10 09:25:57 +04:00
Ethan Buchman
d55243f0e6 fix import paths 2018-07-01 22:36:49 -04:00
Anton Kaliaev
61c5791fa3
revert back to Jae's original payload size limit
except now we calculate the max size using the maxPacketMsgSize()
function, which frees developers from having to know amino encoding
details.

plus, 10 additional bytes are added to leave the room for amino upgrades
(both making it more efficient / less efficient)
2018-06-29 12:57:17 +04:00
Liamsi
c96b27136f remove go-crypto from go-crypto:
use tendermint/crypto :-)
2018-06-20 21:05:38 -07:00
Liamsi
368c236c75 mv go-crypto files to crypto dir 2018-06-20 15:30:44 -07:00