Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Attempted to process a blockchain with missing state root #7937

Open
totoCZ opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Attempted to process a blockchain with missing state root #7937

totoCZ opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@totoCZ
Copy link

totoCZ commented Dec 19, 2024

1.30.1

Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:05 | Processing loop threw an exception. Block: 21434999 (0x79d895...3bbf3a), Exception: System.InvalidOperationException: Attempted to process a blockchain with missing state root 0x90ef04e2f7e3f1b623e524ce6598fce71ee2f1736b3457ef7080929f01b2c010
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]:    at Nethermind.Consensus.Processing.BlockchainProcessor.RunProcessingLoop() in /src/Nethermind/Nethermind.Consensus/Processing/BlockchainProcessor.cs:line 319
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]:    at Nethermind.Consensus.Processing.BlockchainProcessor.Process(Block suggestedBlock, ProcessingOptions options, IBlockTracer tracer, String& error) in /src/Nethermind/Nethermind.Consensus/Processing/BlockchainProcessor.cs:line 393
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]:    at Nethermind.Consensus.Processing.BlockchainProcessor.PrepareBlocksToProcess(Block suggestedBlock, ProcessingOptions options, ProcessingBranch processingBranch) in /src/Nethermind/Nethermind.Consensus/Processing/BlockchainProcessor.cs:line 588
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:05 | Processing loop threw an exception. Block: 21434998 (0x10eae8...164985), Exception: System.InvalidOperationException: Attempted to process a blockchain with missing state root 0x90ef04e2f7e3f1b623e524ce6598fce71ee2f1736b3457ef7080929f01b2c010
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:05 |  Block throughput       14.82 MGas/s  |      149.9 tps |          0.72 Blk/s | recover     0 | process     6
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:05 |  Block mev 0.0459 ETH   20.56 MGas    |      208   txs |  calls  5,030 (107) | sload  16,678 | sstore  6,478 | create   1(-512)
Dec 19 07:13:05 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:05 | Processed            21434995         |    1,387.5 ms  |  slot    100,395 ms |<E2> Gas gwei: 10.03 .. 10.91 (12.52) .. 138.79
Dec 19 07:13:03 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:03 | Non consecutive block commit. This is likely a reorg. Last block commit: 21434994. New block commit: 21434991.
Dec 19 07:13:03 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:03 | Rerunning block after reorg or pruning: 21434994 (0x6a6265...173894)
Dec 19 07:13:03 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:03 | Rerunning block after reorg or pruning: 21434993 (0xcfe019...dadb63)
Dec 19 07:13:03 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:03 | Rerunning block after reorg or pruning: 21434992 (0xc726c0...fe6ae2)
Dec 19 07:13:03 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:03 | Rerunning block after reorg or pruning: 21434991 (0x7f9514...b66733)
Dec 19 07:13:02 systemd-nethermind[2527546]: 19 Dec 07:13:02 | Received ForkChoice: 21435001 (0xd232ac...967aa2), Safe: 21434967 (0x7e42ff...c8a39a), Finalized: 21434935 (0xd72350...d86cbf)

@MarekM25
Copy link
Contributor

@totoCZ, did you get it right after updating and restarting with the new version, or had you been running the node for some time?

@MarekM25
Copy link
Contributor

Unfortunately, the solution is resync. However, it would be great if you share more details

@totoCZ
Copy link
Author

totoCZ commented Dec 19, 2024

It was a fresh sync on that version with grandine as the CL. Restarting ended up replaying the blocks to the same crash.

And it ran for about ~24 hr with no issues.

@MarekM25
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks a lot for the context; this will help us solve the problem. Sorry for the inconvenience.

@totoCZ
Copy link
Author

totoCZ commented Dec 19, 2024

@MarekM25
Copy link
Contributor

Thx a lot!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants