feat: operation queue #85
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
distractedm1nd
force-pushed
the
operation-queue
branch
from
58a1e67
to
a1f243c
Compare
distractedm1nd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2024
* feat: switching to axum, adding swagger UI * feat: operation queue (#85) * feat: operation queue * refactor and beginning test * progress * balls deep in redis debugging * no more deadlock but proof verification fails * test passes if we don't derive tree, but is tree state fucked then? * yanking out derive_tree * renaming Signable trait and method names
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I noticed that the logic from the web demo days never got ported over to Sequencer: We were relying on the update-entry endpoint to update the tree
This update queues operations via the endpoint, and then executes them in finalize_epoch.
There are still some various todos, so it is a WIP. Biggest TODO is unit testing this
Other concern:
This is combining finalize_epoch with running all updates, which is very inefficient considering we could preemptively update. This is necessary though in order to send merkle proofs to API users for the last epoch state and not some intermediate tree state that is not SNARK verifiable. I think this concern is not a big deal because it is essentially what we will be doing once we finish based rollup integration anyways
Closes #87