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

Handle acc_trx_his_object in get_relevant_accounts #816

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 21, 2018

Conversation

abitmore
Copy link
Member

@abitmore abitmore commented Apr 5, 2018

Actually, I'm not sure if it's skipped intentionally. See this code:

         if( id.type() == operation_history_object_type && id.space() == protocol_ids ) continue;
         if( id.type() == impl_account_transaction_history_object_type && id.space() == implementation_ids ) continue;

@abitmore abitmore added this to the 201805 - Non-Consensus-Changing Release milestone Apr 5, 2018
@xeroc
Copy link
Member

xeroc commented Apr 6, 2018

The dockercloud check is failing due to dockercloud messing up somehow

@abitmore abitmore added the 2a Discussion Needed Prompt for team to discuss at next stand up. label Apr 17, 2018
@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor

These history objects are static. It doesn't make sense to subscribe to them because they will not change anyway. I think this is the reason for the exclusion in database_api.

That doesn't mean that they can't be of interest to other callback functions of course.

case impl_account_transaction_history_object_type:
case impl_account_transaction_history_object_type: {
const auto& aobj = dynamic_cast<const account_transaction_history_object*>(obj);
assert( aobj != nullptr );
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please use FC_ASSERT instead

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done.

@abitmore abitmore removed the 2a Discussion Needed Prompt for team to discuss at next stand up. label Apr 21, 2018
@abitmore abitmore merged commit 9470a26 into develop Apr 21, 2018
@abitmore abitmore deleted the abitmore-patch-1 branch April 21, 2018 08:38
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.

3 participants