feat(benchmarking): adding gas burner test

[chatton]

Overview

Closes #3123

Adds TestGasBurner to measure gas throughput using a deterministic gasburner workload. Reports seconds_per_gigagas as the primary metric.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch cian/gass-burner-2

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[claude]

Claude finished @chatton's task in 1m 46s —— View job

---

Code Review

• Gather context
• Read changed files
• Review code quality & architecture
• Review error handling & resilience
• Review testing & reliability
• Post final review

---

Overall the PR is well-structured and follows the existing benchmark patterns closely. The warmup approach (waiting for 50 sent txs before recording startBlock) is a nice improvement over the ERC20 test's implicit warmup. A few issues worth addressing:

Issues

1. Missing transaction failure assertion (gasburner_test.go)

TestGasBurner never checks that transactions didn't fail. TestERC20Throughput asserts this explicitly via waitForSpamoorDone which returns failed:

// ERC20 (spamoor_erc20_test.go:103-104)
s.Require().Greater(sent, float64(0), "at least one transaction should have been sent")
s.Require().Zero(failed, "no transactions should have failed")

The gas burner uses waitForMetricTarget instead, which only tracks spamoor_transactions_sent_total. If a large portion of transactions fail but total sent still reaches totalCount, the test will pass silently. Even a soft check like:

failed, _ := api.GetMetrics()["spamoor_transactions_failed_total"]
if f := sumCounter(failed); f > 0 {
    t.Logf("warning: %.0f transactions failed", f)
}

…would make failures visible. Fix this →

2. secsPerGigagas == 0 still written to result writer (gasburner_test.go:116–120)

When AchievedMGas == 0 (e.g. all blocks empty), secsPerGigagas stays at 0 and is unconditionally appended to the result writer. On the benchmark dashboard, 0 s/Ggas reads as "infinitely fast" rather than "no data". The evNodeOverhead entry already guards with if overhead, ok := ...; ok, so applying the same pattern here would be consistent:

if secsPerGigagas > 0 {
    w.addEntry(entry{...})
}

Fix this →

3. waitForMetricTarget has no progress logging (helpers.go:386–398)

During the 5-minute wait for warmup and full send, there's no indication of how far along the test is. waitForSpamoorDone logs rate and elapsed time on every tick. A single log per poll would make it much easier to diagnose slow runs:

t.Logf("waiting for metric %s: current=%.0f target=%.0f", name, v, target)

Fix this →

Nits

• api alias (gasburner_test.go:34): api := e.spamoorAPI is used only in this test. All other code in the suite uses e.spamoorAPI directly, including the deleteAllSpammers call on line 36 which gets api not e.spamoorAPI. Consistent, but a cosmetic divergence from the ERC20 test style.

• Alignment spacing (helpers.go:314–316): Extra whitespace was added for struct field alignment in summarize(). This is fine, but golangci-lint may flag it depending on config. Worth checking with just lint.

Positives

• The two-phase warmup (wait for 50 txs before recording startBlock) is more deliberate and accurate than the ERC20 approach.
• collectBlockMetrics, blockMetricsSummary, and related helpers are well-documented, cleanly separated, and reused across both tests — good refactoring.
• waitForDrain correctly resets the empty-block counter on any non-empty block, avoiding false positives.
• evNodeOverhead calculation is clear and the guard on produceAvg <= 0 prevents division by zero.

[github-actions]

The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow CI / buf-check (pull_request).

Build	Format	Lint	Breaking	Updated (UTC)
✅ passed	⏩ skipped	✅ passed	✅ passed	Mar 2, 2026, 3:48 PM

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.97%. Comparing base (4c7b7e1) to head (6f56c80).

Additional details and impacted files

@@                   Coverage Diff                    @@
##           cian/erc20-benchmark    #3115      +/-   ##
========================================================
+ Coverage                 60.90%   60.97%   +0.07%     
========================================================
  Files                       113      113              
  Lines                     11617    11617              
========================================================
+ Hits                       7075     7084       +9     
+ Misses                     3743     3735       -8     
+ Partials                    799      798       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
combined	60.97% <ø> (+0.07%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.