You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 12, 2018. It is now read-only.
In our current explorations of syncing, it's useful to know if a TxReport represents a transaction that did nothing. Currently the only way to do find this out is by querying a transactions table after the fact. A simple way to represent this state would be with a simple flag on the TxReport - but perhaps we'd want to know more information about what a transaction did at some point - hence the counts.
This assumes that we'll be using transactor for syncing purposes beyond initial prototyping.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Bear in mind that excision will make these counts wrong, and so will rebasing — in both cases they'll be exaggerations. What you're asking for is presence/non-presence in the tx index, which should not be all that expensive. If you want to make that quite efficient, don't store timestamp datoms in the tx log itself — in that case an empty transaction would really be empty.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Labels
A-syncTracking work around synchronization.A-transactIssues or requests in the transactor.
In our current explorations of syncing, it's useful to know if a TxReport represents a transaction that did nothing. Currently the only way to do find this out is by querying a
transactions
table after the fact. A simple way to represent this state would be with a simple flag on the TxReport - but perhaps we'd want to know more information about what a transaction did at some point - hence the counts.This assumes that we'll be using transactor for syncing purposes beyond initial prototyping.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: