Block size proposal limit checks by ssd04 · Pull Request #7661 · multiversx/mx-chain-go

ssd04 · 2026-02-02T18:01:03Z

Reasoning behind the pull request

Update block size computation component to handle also execution results size
Added limit config field for execution results
Added block size limit checks in gasComputation component

Testing procedure

System test with txs over limit

Pre-requisites

Based on the Contributing Guidelines the PR author and the reviewers must check the following requirements are met:

was the PR targeted to the correct branch?
if this is a larger feature that probably needs more than one PR, is there a feat branch created?
if this is a feat branch merging, do all satellite projects have a proper tag inside go.mod?

This reverts commit eee51d1.

This reverts commit 1f209e3.

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-03T11:31:36Z

process/block/gasConsumption.go

 			return lastMiniBlockIndex, 0, err
 		}
+
+		gc.blockSizeComputation.AddNumMiniBlocks(1)


should this be added also inside the if from L137, for rewards and peer changes?

i was thinking initially that these miniblocks has to be included anyway, added increase limits though

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-03T11:31:40Z

process/block/gasConsumption.go

 	return lastMiniBlockIndex, 0, nil
 }

+func (gc *gasConsumption) increaseBlockSizeLimits(


updated to use it

maybe rename it to something like addMiniBlockToBlockSizeComputation or similar?

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-03T11:42:04Z

process/coordinator/process.go

 	doubleTransactionsDetector   process.DoubleTransactionDetector
 	processedMiniBlocksTracker   process.ProcessedMiniBlocksTracker
 	enableEpochsHandler          common.EnableEpochsHandler
+	enableRoundsHandler          common.EnableRoundsHandler


is this needed?

no, it was part of the old code, removed

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-03T11:49:15Z

process/block/gasConsumption.go

 			break
 		}

+		gc.blockSizeComputation.AddNumMiniBlocks(1)


I'd move this inside if !mbsLimitReached, at L296. This way blockSizeComputation gets updated when miniblocks are added via direct call on AddIncomingMiniBlocks, but also when appending pending ones.

and remove it from L157 this way

right, pushed

Copilot

Pull request overview

This pull request adds block size limit checks for execution results to complement existing gas-based limits. It updates the block size computation component to track execution result sizes and enforces these limits during block proposal creation.

Changes:

Moved LastExecutionResultForInclusion from process/estimator to common package for better code organization
Extended BlockSizeComputationHandler interface with execution result tracking methods (AddNumExecRes, DecNumExecRes, IsMaxExecResSizeReached)
Added MaxExecResSizeInBytes configuration field to BlockSizeThrottleConfig with default value of 10% of 1MB
Integrated execution result size checks in ExecutionResultInclusionEstimator and gasConsumption components
Updated all test files and integration tests to use the new constructor signatures

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 30 out of 30 changed files in this pull request and generated 7 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
config/config.go	Added MaxExecResSizeInBytes field to BlockSizeThrottleConfig
cmd/node/config/config.toml	Added configuration value for execution result size limit
common/dtos.go	Moved LastExecutionResultForInclusion struct from estimator package
process/interface.go	Updated InclusionEstimator interface signature to use common.LastExecutionResultForInclusion
process/block/preprocess/interfaces.go	Extended BlockSizeComputationHandler interface with execution result methods
process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go	Implemented execution result size tracking and limit checking
process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation_test.go	Added tests for execution result size computation methods
process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go	Integrated blockSizeComputation for execution result size checks
process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator_test.go	Updated tests to pass blockSizeComputation parameter
process/block/gasConsumption.go	Added block size limit checks alongside gas limit checks
process/block/gasConsumption_test.go	Updated test arguments with blockSizeComputation
testscommon/blockSizeComputationStub.go	Extended stub with execution result methods
testscommon/generalConfig.go	Added test configuration for new limits
genesis/process/disabled/blockSizeComputationHandler.go	Added no-op implementations for new methods
factory/processing/blockProcessorCreator.go	Updated block processor creation to pass MaxExecResSizeInBytes
Multiple test files	Updated to use new constructor signatures and pass blockSizeComputation

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-02-05T11:45:56Z

process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go

+		if erie.blockSizeComputation.IsMaxExecResSizeReached(1) {
+			log.Debug("ExecutionResultInclusionEstimator: estimated max size reached",
+				"currentIndex", pendingExecutionIndex)
+			return pendingExecutionIndex
+		}
+		erie.blockSizeComputation.AddNumExecRes(1)


The new execution result size limit functionality (IsMaxExecResSizeReached check at line 172) is not covered by any tests. All tests in this file use BlockSizeComputationStub which returns false by default. Consider adding test cases that verify the behavior when the execution result size limit is reached, similar to how MaxResultsPerBlock is tested.

Copilot · 2026-02-05T11:45:57Z

process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go

+		if erie.blockSizeComputation.IsMaxExecResSizeReached(1) {
+			log.Debug("ExecutionResultInclusionEstimator: estimated max size reached",
+				"currentIndex", pendingExecutionIndex)
+			return pendingExecutionIndex
+		}
+		erie.blockSizeComputation.AddNumExecRes(1)


The ExecutionResultInclusionEstimator's Decide method mutates the blockSizeComputation state by calling AddNumExecRes. This is problematic because Decide is called both during block proposal creation (in addExecutionResultsOnHeader) and during block verification (in checkInclusionEstimationForExecutionResults). During verification, we should not mutate shared state as multiple verifications might be happening concurrently, or a verification might interfere with proposal creation. Consider either: 1) making the size check read-only in the estimator and moving the mutation to the caller, or 2) using a separate blockSizeComputation instance for verification vs proposal.

will add a separate check flow for this case, will trigger calculation encapsulated in this call

updated to trigger calculation separately on each call

process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go

process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go

genesis/process/disabled/blockSizeComputationHandler.go

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-06T11:46:16Z

process/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go

 	roundHandler RoundHandler
 	// TODO add also max estimated block gas capacity - used gas must be lower than this
-	blockSizeComputation blockSizeComputationHandler
+	// blockSizeComputation     blockSizeComputationHandler


commented code

sstanculeanu · 2026-02-06T11:47:36Z

process/estimator/executionResultSizeComputation.go

+	}
+
+	var err error
+	ers.execResSize, err = ers.generateDummyExecutionResultSize(marshalizer, 10)


i kept the same estimation as for block, as in blockSizeComputation - currently i think on shard we have up to 5 miniblocks and on meta up to 9

to be discussed, there is also the TODO with the option to have a size estimation calculated dynamically based on real time data, in case we'll have more shards in the future

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-05T11:50:19Z

cmd/node/config/config.toml

 [BlockSizeThrottleConfig]
    MinSizeInBytes = 104857 # 104857 is 10% from 1MB
    MaxSizeInBytes = 943718 # 943718 is 90% from 1MB
+    MaxExecResSizeInBytes = 104857 # 104857 is 10% from 1MB


what is the average size of an execution result? I am curious what would this limitation mean in concrete number of execution results

this limit will allow up to 200 execution results

this is based on the dummy created execution results with 10 miniblocks

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-05T13:14:35Z

process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go

+	dummyHash := make([]byte, 32)
+	_, _ = rand.Reader.Read(dummyHash)
+
+	executionResult := &block.ExecutionResult{


maybe use a meta excution result instead? I think that one has more fields.

changed to use meta

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-06T13:04:15Z

process/estimator/executionResultSizeComputation.go

+	return ers, nil
+}
+
+func (ers *execResSizeComputation) generateDummyExecutionResultSize(


can you generate the size estimation based on the larger result? (I think the metachain result is larger).

codecov · 2026-02-09T13:37:45Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 79.57447% with 48 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.51%. Comparing base (0a9b44a) to head (13a1de8).
⚠️ Report is 31 commits behind head on feat/supernova-async-exec.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
factory/processing/blockProcessorCreator.go	66.66%	6 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
...ess/estimator/executionResultInclusionEstimator.go	61.90%	5 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...rocess/estimator/executionResultSizeComputation.go	87.50%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
process/block/gasConsumption.go	84.61%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
process/block/preprocess/basePreProcess.go	75.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
process/block/preprocess/miniBlockBuilder.go	78.94%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
process/block/preprocess/transactions.go	66.66%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go	91.30%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
process/estimator/executionResultSizeChecker.go	83.33%	2 Missing ⚠️
process/block/preprocess/rewardTxPreProcessor.go	66.66%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
... and 2 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@                      Coverage Diff                      @@
##           feat/supernova-async-exec    #7661      +/-   ##
=============================================================
- Coverage                      77.51%   77.51%   -0.01%     
=============================================================
  Files                            880      882       +2     
  Lines                         122576   122753     +177     
=============================================================
+ Hits                           95016    95146     +130     
- Misses                         21233    21263      +30     
- Partials                        6327     6344      +17

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-09T13:47:06Z

process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go

+
+// DecNumMiniBlocks decrements the provided value to numMiniBlocks in a concurrent safe manner
+func (bsc *blockSizeComputation) DecNumMiniBlocks(numMiniBlocks int) {
+	atomic.AddInt32(&bsc.numMiniBlocks, -int32(numMiniBlocks))


prevent going below 0?

added check

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-09T13:48:24Z

process/block/preprocess/blockSizeComputation.go

+
+// DecNumTxs decrements the provided value to numTxs in a concurrent safe manner
+func (bsc *blockSizeComputation) DecNumTxs(numTxs int) {
+	atomic.AddInt32(&bsc.numTxs, -int32(numTxs))


prevent going below 0 ?

added check

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-09T14:32:33Z

process/estimator/executionResultSizeComputation.go

+				GasUsed:     1234,
+			},
+			ValidatorStatsRootHash: dummyHash,
+			AccumulatedFeesInEpoch: big.NewInt(0),


maybe have larger values for the bigints, fully denominated egld values

updated to use bigger values

AdoAdoAdo · 2026-02-09T14:48:20Z

process/block/gasConsumption.go

 		mbType := miniBlocks[i].GetTypeInt32()
 		if mbType == int32(block.RewardsBlock) || mbType == int32(block.PeerBlock) {
 			// rewards and validator info have 0 gas limit, thus they should be included anyway without checking their transactions
+			gc.addMiniBlockToBlockSizeComputation(miniBlocks[i])


seems like there is no check for the peer + rewards mbs, if we have reached the size limit before adding more.

there is no check on gas consumption, so did not add for size limit; they are counted for size but with no check

block proposal size limit - init checks

1f209e3

ssd04 self-assigned this Feb 2, 2026

ssd04 added 5 commits February 3, 2026 10:21

add block size computation

eee51d1

add block size computation in gas consumption component

2ff6204

Revert "add block size computation"

97e4a2d

This reverts commit eee51d1.

Revert "block proposal size limit - init checks"

3d224af

This reverts commit 1f209e3.

add handling for revert case

19fba04

ssd04 marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2026 11:11

sstanculeanu reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

ssd04 and others added 6 commits February 3, 2026 14:07

fixes after review

79bbe33

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

37bc6fc

add size checker for execution results

18b3bc7

fix unit tests

1352252

add todo for exec res estimator

ff62209

remove unused code

303e5dc

ssd04 changed the title ~~block proposal size limit - init checks~~ Block size proposal limit checks Feb 3, 2026

fix default config

2c9e9cc

sstanculeanu previously approved these changes Feb 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

ssd04 added 2 commits February 5, 2026 12:01

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

e607a8b

fix block size computation for exec results

6aff50d

ssd04 dismissed sstanculeanu’s stale review via 6aff50d February 5, 2026 10:40

AdoAdoAdo requested review from AdoAdoAdo and Copilot February 5, 2026 10:54

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of AdoAdoAdo February 5, 2026 11:39 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

ssd04 added 2 commits February 6, 2026 12:17

use separate instance for proposal flow

64fc97f

change to calculate limit size atomically

503abe0

sstanculeanu reviewed Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

remove commented code

397d6c8

AdoAdoAdo reviewed Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

ssd04 and others added 6 commits February 6, 2026 17:04

check size limit on old flow only if async not enabled

83d7653

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

2c8f81e

add underflow protection

c06c709

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

b73d9bf

estimate size based on meta execution result

f093ae9

disable block size checks on processing if async not enabled

9830907

sstanculeanu previously approved these changes Feb 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

AdoAdoAdo previously approved these changes Feb 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

AdoAdoAdo reviewed Feb 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

below 0 check + more unit tests

9b34e42

ssd04 dismissed stale reviews from AdoAdoAdo and sstanculeanu via 9b34e42 February 10, 2026 11:24

ssd04 added 2 commits February 10, 2026 13:28

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

c5afd23

fixes after merge

1c019fb

sstanculeanu approved these changes Feb 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

AdoAdoAdo approved these changes Feb 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

ssd04 and others added 3 commits February 10, 2026 15:12

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

c43d8df

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

d954050

Merge branch 'feat/supernova-async-exec' into size-limit-block-proposal

13a1de8

ssd04 merged commit 0d8b216 into feat/supernova-async-exec Feb 10, 2026
9 checks passed

ssd04 deleted the size-limit-block-proposal branch February 10, 2026 15:17

Conversation

ssd04 commented Feb 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reasoning behind the pull request

Testing procedure

Pre-requisites

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ssd04 commented Feb 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading