-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 428
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Improve list contracts by code query #497
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #497 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 58.45% 58.41% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 41 41
Lines 4441 4437 -4
==========================================
- Hits 2596 2592 -4
Misses 1631 1631
Partials 214 214
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good job with the code index, and looks like a good improvement. But I don't see any migration tests here.
Can you add one that explicitly shows a different ordering based on migration vs creation?
CodeID: 1, | ||
Created: &AbsoluteTxPosition{2 + 1<<(8*7), 3 + 1<<(8*7)}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would keep a different Created
here just to prove it takes one and ignores the other.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have switched from ContractInfo
to ContractCodeHistoryEntry
element. Any instantiation/migration results in a new ContractCodeHistoryEntry
so that it covers both.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking good. Thanks for that test
Resolves #323
Breaking change:
List contracts by code returns now the addresses without other data from CodeInfo
This was a gas intensive query before. Especially with the legacy rest endpoint