TxPool: simplify byPriceAndNonce algorithm (#2978)

Remove the intermediate bySender table usage. This will lower
the memory and CPU usage.

Also add more comments about how algorithm works.

nimbus/core/tx_pool.nim

@@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
 # at your option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed except
 # according to those terms.
 
+## Pool coding
+## ===========
+## A piece of code using this pool architecture could look like as follows:
+## ::
+##    # see also unit test examples, e.g. "Block packer tests"
+##    var chain: ForkedChainRef              # to be initialised
+##
+##
+##    var xp = TxPoolRef.new(chain)          # initialise tx-pool
+##    ..
+##
+##    xq.addTx(txs)                          # add transactions ..
+##    ..                                     # .. into the buckets
+##
+##    let bundle = xp.assembleBlock          # fetch current block
+##
+##    xp.removeNewBlockTxs(bundle.blk)       # remove used transactions
+##
+## Why not remove used transactions in `assembleBlock`?
+## ::
+##    There is probability the block we proposed is rejected by
+##    by network or other client produce an accepted block.
+##    The block param passed through `removeNewBlockTxs` can be
+##    a block newer than the the one last produced by `assembleBlock`.
+
+
 {.push raises: [].}
 
 import

nimbus/core/tx_pool/tx_desc.nim

@@ -293,6 +293,19 @@ proc addTx*(xp: TxPoolRef, ptx: PooledTransaction): Result[void, TxError] =
       return err(txErrorInvalidSignature)
     nonce = xp.getNonce(sender)
 
+  # The downside of this arrangement is the ledger is not
+  # always up to date. The comparison below
+  # does not always filter out transactions with lower nonce.
+  # But it will not affect the correctness of the subsequent
+  # algorithm. In `byPriceAndNonce`, once again transactions
+  # with lower nonce are filtered out, for different reason.
+  # But the end result is same, transactions packed in a block only
+  # have consecutive nonces >= than current account's nonce.
+  #
+  # Calling something like:
+  # if xp.chain.latestHash != xp.parentHash:
+  #   xp.updateVmState()
+  # maybe can solve the accuracy but it is quite expensive.
   if ptx.tx.nonce < nonce:
     return err(txErrorNonceTooSmall)
 
@@ -313,7 +326,6 @@ proc addTx*(xp: TxPoolRef, ptx: PooledTransaction): Result[void, TxError] =
 proc addTx*(xp: TxPoolRef, tx: Transaction): Result[void, TxError] =
   xp.addTx(PooledTransaction(tx: tx))
 
-
 iterator byPriceAndNonce*(xp: TxPoolRef): TxItemRef =
   for item in byPriceAndNonce(xp.senderTab, xp.idTab,
       xp.vmState.ledger, xp.baseFee):

nimbus/core/tx_pool/tx_tabs.nim

@@ -38,9 +38,6 @@ template insertOrReplace*(sn: TxSenderNonceRef, item: TxItemRef) =
   sn.list.findOrInsert(item.nonce).
     expect("insert txitem ok").data = item
 
-func last*(sn: TxSenderNonceRef): auto  =
-  sn.list.le(AccountNonce.high)
-
 func len*(sn: TxSenderNonceRef): auto  =
   sn.list.len
 
@@ -48,20 +45,52 @@ iterator byPriceAndNonce*(senderTab: TxSenderTab,
                           idTab: var TxIdTab,
                           ledger: LedgerRef,
                           baseFee: GasInt): TxItemRef =
-  template removeFirstAndPushTo(sn, byPrice) =
-    let rc = sn.list.ge(AccountNonce.low).valueOr:
-      continue
-    discard sn.list.delete(rc.data.nonce)
-    byPrice.push(rc.data)
 
-  var byNonce: TxSenderTab
+  ## This algorithm and comment is taken from ethereumjs but modified.
+  ##
+  ## Returns eligible txs to be packed sorted by price in such a way that the
+  ## nonce orderings within a single account are maintained.
+  ##
+  ## Note, this is not as trivial as it seems from the first look as there are three
+  ## different criteria that need to be taken into account (price, nonce, account
+  ## match), which cannot be done with any plain sorting method, as certain items
+  ## cannot be compared without context.
+  ##
+  ## This method first sorts the list of transactions into individual
+  ## sender accounts and sorts them by nonce.
+  ##    -- This is done by senderTab internal algorithm.
+  ##
+  ## After the account nonce ordering is satisfied, the results are merged back
+  ## together by price, always comparing only the head transaction from each account.
+  ## This is done via a heap to keep it fast.
+  ##
+  ## @param baseFee Provide a baseFee to exclude txs with a lower gasPrice
+  ##
+
+  template getHeadAndPushTo(sn, byPrice, nonce) =
+    let rc = sn.list.ge(nonce)
+    if rc.isOk:
+      let item = rc.get.data
+      item.calculatePrice(baseFee)
+      byPrice.push(item)
+
+  # HeapQueue needs `<` to be overloaded for custom object
+  # and in this case, we want to pop highest price first.
+  # That's why we use '>' instead of '<' in the implementation.
+  func `<`(a, b: TxItemRef): bool {.used.} = a.price > b.price
+  var byPrice = initHeapQueue[TxItemRef]()
+
+  # Fill byPrice with `head item` from each account.
+  # The `head item` is the lowest allowed nonce.
   for address, sn in senderTab:
-    var
+    let nonce = ledger.getNonce(address)
-      nonce = ledger.getNonce(address)      
-      sortedByNonce: TxSenderNonceRef
 
-    # Remove item with nonce lower than current account.
+    # Remove item with nonce lower than current account's nonce.
     # Happen when proposed block rejected.
+    # removeNewBlockTxs will also remove this kind of txs,
+    # but in a less explicit way. And probably less thoroughly.
+    # EMV will reject the transaction too, but we filter it here
+    # for efficiency.
     var rc = sn.list.lt(nonce)
     while rc.isOk:
       let item = rc.get.data
@@ -69,35 +98,24 @@ iterator byPriceAndNonce*(senderTab: TxSenderTab,
       discard sn.list.delete(item.nonce)
       rc = sn.list.lt(nonce)
 
-    # Check if the account nonce matches the lowest known tx nonce
+    # Check if the account nonce matches the lowest known tx nonce.
-    rc = sn.list.ge(nonce)
+    sn.getHeadAndPushTo(byPrice, nonce)
-    while rc.isOk:
-      let item = rc.get.data
-      item.calculatePrice(baseFee)
-      
-      if sortedByNonce.isNil:
-        sortedByNonce = TxSenderNonceRef.init()
-        byNonce[address] = sortedByNonce
-
-      sortedByNonce.insertOrReplace(item)
-      # If there is a gap, sn.list.eq will return isErr
-      nonce = item.nonce + 1
-      rc = sn.list.eq(nonce)
-
-  # HeapQueue needs `<` to be overloaded for custom object
-  # and in this case, we want to pop highest price first
-  func `<`(a, b: TxItemRef): bool {.used.} = a.price > b.price
-  var byPrice = initHeapQueue[TxItemRef]()
-  for _, sn in byNonce:
-    sn.removeFirstAndPushTo(byPrice)
 
   while byPrice.len > 0:
-    # Retrieve the next best transaction by price
+    # Retrieve the next best transaction by price.
     let best = byPrice.pop()
 
-    # Push in its place the next transaction from the same account
+    # Push in its place the next transaction from the same account.
-    let sn = byNonce.getOrDefault(best.sender)
+    let sn = senderTab.getOrDefault(best.sender)
-    if sn.isNil.not and sn.len > 0:
+    if sn.isNil.not:
-      sn.removeFirstAndPushTo(byPrice)
+      # This algorithm will automatically reject
+      # transaction with nonce gap(best.nonce + 1)
+      # EVM will reject this kind transaction too, but
+      # why do expensive EVM call when we can do it cheaply here.
+      # We don't remove transactions with gap like we do with transactions
+      # of lower nonce? because they might be  packed by future blocks
+      # when the gap is filled. Worst case is they will expired and get purged by
+      # `removeExpiredTxs`
+      sn.getHeadAndPushTo(byPrice, best.nonce + 1)
 
     yield best