fix: use the same ProviderFactory in reth node (#5778)

This commit is contained in:
Dan Cline
2023-12-15 16:01:12 +02:00
committed by GitHub
parent 30efaf4a72
commit cc4bd7c306
3 changed files with 24 additions and 25 deletions

View File

@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ use crate::{
Metrics, PrunerError, PrunerEvent,
};
use reth_db::database::Database;
use reth_primitives::{BlockNumber, ChainSpec, PruneMode, PruneProgress, PruneSegment};
use reth_primitives::{BlockNumber, PruneMode, PruneProgress, PruneSegment};
use reth_provider::{ProviderFactory, PruneCheckpointReader};
use reth_snapshot::HighestSnapshotsTracker;
use reth_tokio_util::EventListeners;
@ -46,8 +46,7 @@ pub struct Pruner<DB> {
impl<DB: Database> Pruner<DB> {
/// Creates a new [Pruner].
pub fn new(
db: DB,
chain_spec: Arc<ChainSpec>,
provider_factory: ProviderFactory<DB>,
segments: Vec<Arc<dyn Segment<DB>>>,
min_block_interval: usize,
delete_limit: usize,
@ -55,7 +54,7 @@ impl<DB: Database> Pruner<DB> {
highest_snapshots_tracker: HighestSnapshotsTracker,
) -> Self {
Self {
provider_factory: ProviderFactory::new(db, chain_spec),
provider_factory,
segments,
min_block_interval,
previous_tip_block_number: None,
@ -267,12 +266,14 @@ mod tests {
use crate::Pruner;
use reth_db::test_utils::create_test_rw_db;
use reth_primitives::MAINNET;
use reth_provider::ProviderFactory;
use tokio::sync::watch;
#[test]
fn is_pruning_needed() {
let db = create_test_rw_db();
let mut pruner = Pruner::new(db, MAINNET.clone(), vec![], 5, 0, 5, watch::channel(None).1);
let provider_factory = ProviderFactory::new(db, MAINNET.clone());
let mut pruner = Pruner::new(provider_factory, vec![], 5, 0, 5, watch::channel(None).1);
// No last pruned block number was set before
let first_block_number = 1;