Skip to content

feat: filtering public logs by tag#21471

Closed
benesjan wants to merge 1 commit intomerge-train/fairiesfrom
03-13-refactor_filtering_public_logs_by_tag
Closed

feat: filtering public logs by tag#21471
benesjan wants to merge 1 commit intomerge-train/fairiesfrom
03-13-refactor_filtering_public_logs_by_tag

Conversation

@benesjan
Copy link
Contributor

@benesjan benesjan commented Mar 13, 2026

I am not sure if the code in this PR is good because it doesn't leverage the tag index as was requested by this issue.

When I answered that F-224 seems to be implemented I was not aware that that index is not easily usable. The issue is that we seem to have multiple log types and the getPublicLogs function looks too complicated (see here).

This is the plan AI came up with:

image

This is what I propose:

  1. Since this changes node interface and we want to have all the changes done to the node interface by alpha release we merge this inefficient but from the POV of node interface final code,
  2. we ping alpha team about this inefficiency and let them do whatever with it (I don't think fairies should be doing this).

Copy link
Contributor Author

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@benesjan benesjan changed the title refactor: filtering public logs by tag feat: filtering public logs by tag Mar 13, 2026
@benesjan benesjan marked this pull request as ready for review March 13, 2026 05:09
@benesjan benesjan requested a review from nventuro March 13, 2026 05:10
@nventuro
Copy link
Contributor

Superceded by #21561.

@nventuro nventuro closed this Mar 13, 2026
nventuro added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2026
Reimplementation of
#21471. I did the
filtering in-memory as explained there due to lack of indices.

Additionally I fixed a bug in which certain index tuples were ignored -
e.g. if `afterLog` and `txHash` were both specified, `txHash` was
ignored.

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
AztecBot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2026
Reimplementation of
#21471. I did the
filtering in-memory as explained there due to lack of indices.

Additionally I fixed a bug in which certain index tuples were ignored -
e.g. if `afterLog` and `txHash` were both specified, `txHash` was
ignored.

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

2 participants