Maybe it already got one of the corrupted hashes from a different server and it doesn't double-check that the hash from every server is correct. Or another problem. But in any case I'm marking this as TODO because an even better (more picky) verifier is less urgent than repairer.
New checker and verifier use the new download class. They are robust against various sorts of failures or corruption. They return detailed results explaining what they learned about your immutable files. Some grotesque sorts of corruption are not properly handled yet, and those ones are marked as TODO or commented-out in the unit tests.
There is also a repairer module in this patch with the beginnings of a repairer in it. That repairer is mostly just the interface to the outside world -- the core operation of actually reconstructing the missing data blocks and uploading them is not in there yet.
This patch also refactors the unit tests in test_immutable so that the handling of each kind of corruption is reported as passing or failing separately, can be separately TODO'ified, etc. The unit tests are also improved in various ways to require more of the code under test or to stop requiring unreasonable things of it. :-)
The code for validating the share hash tree and the block hash tree has been rewritten to make sure it handles all cases, to share metadata about the file (such as the share hash tree, block hash trees, and UEB) among different share downloads, and not to require hashes to be stored on the server unnecessarily, such as the roots of the block hash trees (not needed since they are also the leaves of the share hash tree), and the root of the share hash tree (not needed since it is also included in the UEB). It also passes the latest tests including handling corrupted shares well.
ValidatedReadBucketProxy takes a share_hash_tree argument to its constructor, which is a reference to a share hash tree shared by all ValidatedReadBucketProxies for that immutable file download.
ValidatedReadBucketProxy requires the block_size and share_size to be provided in its constructor, and it then uses those to compute the offsets and lengths of blocks when it needs them, instead of reading those values out of the share. The user of ValidatedReadBucketProxy therefore has to have first used a ValidatedExtendedURIProxy to compute those two values from the validated contents of the URI. This is pleasingly simplifies safety analysis: the client knows which span of bytes corresponds to a given block from the validated URI data, rather than from the unvalidated data stored on the storage server. It also simplifies unit testing of verifier/repairer, because now it doesn't care about the contents of the "share size" and "block size" fields in the share. It does not relieve the need for share data v2 layout, because we still need to store and retrieve the offsets of the fields which come after the share data, therefore we still need to use share data v2 with its 8-byte fields if we want to store share data larger than about 2^32.
Specify which subset of the block hashes and share hashes you need while downloading a particular share. In the future this will hopefully be used to fetch only a subset, for network efficiency, but currently all of them are fetched, regardless of which subset you specify.
ReadBucketProxy hides the question of whether it has "started" or not (sent a request to the server to get metadata) from its user.
Download is optimized to do as few roundtrips and as few requests as possible, hopefully speeding up download a bit.
This does raise the question of if there is any point to this test, since I apparently don't know what the answer *should* be, and whenever one of the buildbots fails then I redefine success.
But, I'm about to commit a bunch of patches to implement checker, verifier, and repairer as well as to refactor downloader, and I would really like to know if these patches *increase* the number of reads required even higher than it currently is.
