fix: behavior when pending block is not present in db #258
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
Coverage reportThe coverage rate is
Diff Coverage details (click to unfold)crates/client/db/src/block_db.rs
crates/client/rpc/src/versions/v0_7_1/methods/read/get_block_with_receipts.rs
|
Trantorian1
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2024
antiyro
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Pull Request type
What is the current behavior?
RPC endpoints return BlockNotFound when doing any call on Pending, when the block is in db
What is the new behavior?
Match the pathfinder and juno behavior: behave as if there is a pending block in db in that case. The new behavior makes sense to me for call, estimate, simulate etc - but I was surprised to see that they also return a fake pending block for get_block rpcs too - all the endpoints, really. We need to match their behavior even if it's questionable because that's what the clients expect.
Does this introduce a breaking change?
No