Skip to content

Async Persistence TODOs #3052

Open
Open

Description

@TheBlueMatt

While we "shipped" async persistence quite a few releases ago, we've always maintained that it is an alpha feature and has some known (and probably unknown) bugs. This is a tracking issue for both, specifically things I think we should audit as well as things I'm confident are broken, or at least at some point or another took a note of because I was confident it was broken at that time.

Things that are probably broken

Things we should audit carefully

  • Check that we re-claim payments from other MPP channels if we restart and only managed to claim on one channel, specifically:
    • test various scenarios around force-closes on the first channel we claimed on potentially removing any blocks on the second channel or otherwise ensure we re-claim.
    • Test mpp cases around blocking the paymentclaimable event getting handled before we remove the preimage from disk? (my personal 2023-11-mon-claim-bug branch branch - Block monitor updates to ensure preimages are in each MPP part #3120)
  • PaymentClaiable purports to provide a guarantee that the payment is claimable, however if we start persisting the monitor, then the user sees the PaymentClaimable, then we restart without completing monitor or manager persistence, the counterparty could broadcast the previous state and we cant get the payment. (Very) marginally expand test_monitor_update_fail_claim #3126. Similarly, if we do persist the monitor but not the manager, we'll force-close and fail the HTLC back, which is the same end-result (this was never true, we'll obviously use the preimage in a monitor to claim on-chain 🤦).
    • we shouldn't provide the PaymentClaimable event until the last RAA persistence completes. also delays PaymentClaimable which is good for privacy (makes it look more like a forward)
  • When doing async persistence for initial channel open, what happens when...
    • the initial persist is pending, never completed, and then we restart?
    • the initial persist is pending, is it possible to get an update before it completes (hitting the InvalidValue return in channelmanager deser)?
  • What happens when we get an in-flight update from channelmanager on startup for a closed channel? We handle this now.
  • Make sure all ChannelMonitor access in ChannelManager::read is RO, and make the monitors map non-mutable. Done in 6c203d8
  • Check that PaymentClaimed is regenerated on restart properly if we have a preimage in at least one (potentially of MPP) channel
  • What happens if we send a payment, dont persist the channelmanager at all until the payment has gone all the way through the state machine and been claimed/failed? presumably on claim the event processing blocks the raa but maybe does for paymentfailed too?

Finally, to actually "release" it, we should:

Activity

  1. added this to the 0.1 milestone on May 7, 2024
  2. TheBlueMatt commented on Jun 3, 2024

    @TheBlueMatt
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Check that we re-claim payments from other MPP channels if we restart and only managed to claim on one channel, specifically:

    This is, somewhat surprisingly, not currently broken, but its quite subtle and I kinda want to block related channels here anyway (edit: this was done in #3120). Right now, when we do a claim, we hold the total_consistency_lock read lock for the duration of the MPP claim (across all channels); this is quite important and I don't see this changing. Further, on startup, if we see one monitor with a preimage we'll replay it on all other monitors as long as the pending payment is still there. Thus there's really only two cases here, we either claim the payment via some ChannelMonitor's preimage in which case the ChannelManager replays the whole thing on startup (and the channel that did get updated force-closes) or the ChannelManager has completed a persistence after the claim, at which point it has all the other ChannelMonitors queued up and will replay them through the normal async pipeline.

    This relies on another important property that is critical to our payment receipt flow working, but is not documented and we really shouldn't rely on - the ChannelManager is always persisted between receiving a payment and claiming it. This is a side-effect of the way our lightning-background-processor works, specifically that we always interleave event processing and ChannelManager persistence. (@G8XSU we should persist the ChannelManager::claimable_payments info in ChannelMonitors with the HTLCs so that we can recreate the PaymentClaimed even for users even if the ChannelManager never gets persisted between first receiving the payment HTLC and claiming it).

    If we assume we make that change, the MPP-with-async-persist flow would become unsafe - we could have one channel complete its full claim persist and commitment_signed dance then restart and wouldn't be able to reclaim the payment because the preimage is missing. Thus, I'd like to go ahead and land an RAAMonitorUpdateBlockingAction for MPP claims, but not store it to disk as we can always regenerate it when we replay the claim.

  3. TheBlueMatt commented on Dec 12, 2024

    @TheBlueMatt
    CollaboratorAuthor

    We're not gonna get all the testing we wanted, but we'll get #3414 for 0.1 and that handles the only known-broken case. There's some less common cases described above which may or maybe not be broken in 0.1.

  4. modified the milestones: 0.1, 0.2 on Dec 12, 2024
  5. TheBlueMatt commented on Sep 19, 2025

    @TheBlueMatt
    CollaboratorAuthor

    We landed all the known-bug-fixes and hope to land #4063 in 0.2. The remaining issues are testing and moving to no longer calling async storage "beta", which won't happen in 0.2.

  6. modified the milestones: 0.2, 0.4 on Sep 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions