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

feat: Make sync compatible with node's next #758

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Feb 25, 2025
Merged

Conversation

igamigo
Copy link
Collaborator

@igamigo igamigo commented Feb 24, 2025

Makes the sync process compatible with next until the core changes are updated through #650 and #751

@tomyrd
Copy link
Collaborator

tomyrd commented Feb 24, 2025

The new apply_nullifiers endpoint is just temporary (it's a way to reduce the number of calls to the check nullifier endpoint). It will be removed with the state sync refactor.

Comment on lines 37 to 39
.unwrap()
.try_into()
.unwrap(),
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can this unwraps be replaced with RpcConversionErrors? Thought I don't know if is worth considering that this will not last long.

Comment on lines +315 to +319
async fn apply_nullifiers(
&self,
note_updates: NoteUpdates,
transactions_to_discard: Vec<TransactionId>,
) -> Result<(), StoreError>;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could use a comment here, saying that this is temporary

CHANGELOG.md Outdated
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
* [BREAKING] Refactored authentication out of the `Client` and added new separate authenticators (#718).
* Re-exported RemoteTransactionProver in `rust-client` (#752).
* Moved error handling to the `TransactionRequestBuilder::build()` (#750).
* [BREAKING] Added starting block number parameter to `CheckNullifiersByPrefix` (#749).
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe mention that nullifiers were removed from SyncState? Also this references a closed PR

@igamigo igamigo marked this pull request as ready for review February 25, 2025 02:39
@igamigo igamigo merged commit e830854 into next Feb 25, 2025
13 checks passed
@igamigo igamigo deleted the igamigo-next-sync branch February 25, 2025 14:37
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants